10/100 network woes
-
@thecreativeone91 still only 2 people using QB...and only occasionally daily.
-
Also it's not a server, it's the bosses PC with QB on it with a simple file share for the office assistant to use.
I was on the PCs the other day and I didn't notice any network issues, and since NOTHING is networked but a QB file from a PC, I am not sure there is anything wrong. I will wait for the office assistant to return to see what she says, since she is the main QB worker via the shared folder.
-
Sympathy pain upvote for 10/100 and the switching chain of death and sadness.
-
@MattSpeller said:
Sympathy pain upvote for 10/100 and the switching chain of death and sadness.
That's where FastEthernet will get you. The one uplink port is a 100Mb/s bottleneck of unhappiness. GigE is generally overkill to the desktop. You'll never see a desktop pulling more than 300Mb/s and very rarely even 100Mb's. But any shared port has that extra overhead to use. In FastEthernet, each port is likely a bit of a bottleneck and when anything attempts to share a port you feel the bottleneck very strongly.
-
@technobabble said:
Also it's not a server, it's the bosses PC with QB on it with a simple file share for the office assistant to use.
I was on the PCs the other day and I didn't notice any network issues, and since NOTHING is networked but a QB file from a PC, I am not sure there is anything wrong. I will wait for the office assistant to return to see what she says, since she is the main QB worker via the shared folder.
Is this data going between the two switches? Also what are the switches? and do they have 1 gig uplinks?
-
@scottalanmiller yup, the switching chain is where the upgrade to gig will let you get away with murder compared to 10/100. We have to run port agg and dropped lots of cash to run dual cables between each of the floors to keep the layout as flat as possible. Blatant case of flushing good money after bad but no other option.
-
QB is very sensative to latency. really the program is meant to be run locally. It's just a workaround for people who don't want to spend the money (or switch to open source) for a type of [transnational] program that would be better served by a database system than a file system.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
QB is very sensative to latency. really the program is meant to be run locally. It's just a workaround for people who don't want to spend the money (or switch to open source) for a type of [transnational] program that would be better served by a database system than a file system.
What is mind-boggling is that there are awesome, hosted, free options like Wave that kick the absolute crap out of QB. Yet these small businesses continue to make massive donations to Intuit, make their own lives hell and spend a fortune on IT people who can only make vane attempts to get QB to limp along. Why would any person with an interest in the finances or the success of a business even allow Intuit to be a consideration?
-
@MattSpeller said:
@scottalanmiller yup, the switching chain is where the upgrade to gig will let you get away with murder compared to 10/100. We have to run port agg and dropped lots of cash to run dual cables between each of the floors to keep the layout as flat as possible. Blatant case of flushing good money after bad but no other option.
Yeah, go to smart switches with GigE and suddenly you have 2Gb/s or even 4Gb/s on uplinks even without being stackable.
-
Daisy chained switches are bad. FastEthernet switches are generally bad. But having both.... you just have no wiggle room. Things are going to suffer.
-
@thecreativeone91
No data is on the network save for the QB file which is on one desktop and shared via WIndows shared file.
First device from customer owned cable modem is Netgear WNR200v3 and then there is another white consumer Netgear 5 port switch.
I will be going out there next week to eyeball the "network" and will report back my findings.
-
Could be almost anything there when you actually get a look at it.
-
@thecreativeone91 I was about their issue on the way out of the office. I will be going back and will be able to answer the questions properly. From the office managers seat I could see the router beside the cable modem which is next to the PC. When I get back I will physically trace the wires for a better understanding.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
QB is very sensative to latency. really the program is meant to be run locally. It's just a workaround for people who don't want to spend the money (or switch to open source) for a type of [transnational] program that would be better served by a database system than a file system.
What is mind-boggling is that there are awesome, hosted, free options like Wave that kick the absolute crap out of QB. Yet these small businesses continue to make massive donations to Intuit, make their own lives hell and spend a fortune on IT people who can only make vane attempts to get QB to limp along. Why would any person with an interest in the finances or the success of a business even allow Intuit to be a consideration?
Yep...I have used Wave before and liked it. I find that even server hosted QB comes with too many issues. I remember 3 years ago I had to call QB support and they said.well that's because you were using W7 and you need to disable everything so our product will work. (generalization)
-
Intuit and QB are total garbage. No idea how to make software. If I see QB in a business, I know they don't think very much of themselves. It's ridiculous. That anyone would give money to Intuit is crazy.
-
Also it seems that small businesses and mom & pop businesses use QB because that's what the accountant or bookkeeper suggested. A couple of years ago I asked a couple of the local big accounting firms about software and they only worked with QB and Sage.
-
I'm just glad to hear the phones aren't the problem.
-
@technobabble said:
Also it seems that small businesses and mom & pop businesses use QB because that's what the accountant or bookkeeper suggested. A couple of years ago I asked a couple of the big accounting firms about software and they only worked with QB and Sage.
Yeah, that's how you know you have incompetent accountants. That's like hiring IT people who only know Windows XP and Symantec AV and have to sell you a firewall or they can't support it. We all know what a useless, incompetent IT MSP looks like and we all know what the same sort of accountant looks like, and that's it. If you are hiring those accountants, again, you can't think much of your business. They sure don't. Using QB is a good way to announce to everyone that this business is a joke and you aren't just aware of it, you are telling everyone and having a good giggle.
QB is only used by accountants who are making extra money on the side screwing their customers by selling it to them (screwing them over and over by being bad accountants, selling them overpriced software, software that doesn't meet their needs, etc.) or by those that are incapable of using other software and that alone should be a terrifying state for your accountant to be in!
-
We support some big accounting offices and they do anything they can to get their customers off of QB. Accountants who care and take pride in their work won't try to get you on QB.
-
@scottalanmiller And as always it's a fight between professionals. Never helps that the other "professionals" go with the status quo.. Aside from Wave there is Freshbooks, Xero, Harvest and many more to choose from. I know I looked at them all when my MS Accounting was at EOL.
For kicks, I think I will hit up all the accounting firms in town to see if in 2015 they have changed their tune.
