..or maybe Access will work after all...
There's lots of reasons why SQL is a good choice, these are :
1 - Reliability. If the Server crashes when running SQL you can 99.99% sure
that you won't lose data. But is Access crashes you'll only be 99% sure.
(I made these figure up - but you get the picture)
2 - Scalability. SQL server is a great product for multi-user systems and
it can run fast, but only if you use Stored Procedures. Otherwise SQL Server
is slower than Access.
3 - Bells & Whistles. There loads of tools that you get with SQL Server that
you don't get with Access. Will you use them ? Probably not.
But Access has got a few things going for it as well :
1 - Speed. Access is faster (this is because all the complex stuff that makes
SQL great take RAM and processing power - In Access all these Resources are
2 - Simplicity. Access is easy to get going. SQL isn't.
On your intranet the ASP (running on the Server) will probably be doing all
the database updating. This will mean that record locking (one of the biggest
reasons that Access has trouble with multiuser systems) MAY NOT be a problem.
So look at the skills you have and if you have lots of Access skill then
stick with Access.
If you need a mission critical system go for SQL Server (but VERY few systems
need to be 100% reliable).
Alternatively you could start with Access and then migrate to SQL Server,
this will certainly take more time, but provided you choose your column and
table names carefully you can make the migration easier. If the system is
a success then you'll be able to justify the time of the migration.
Top DevX Stories
Easy Web Services with SQL Server 2005 HTTP Endpoints
JavaOne 2005: Java Platform Roadmap Focuses on Ease of Development, Sun Focuses on the "Free" in F.O.S.S.
Wed Yourself to UML with the Power of Associations
Microsoft to Add AJAX Capabilities to ASP.NET
IBM's Cloudscape Versus MySQL