Better still than using the host as a client. A little more protection
(since the host isn’t trying to keep track of itself while also doing client
stuff), a little better performance. Gets you halfway to a proper setup,
which you could implement later.

The performance and, most particularly, the safety advantages to using
server obtain for three clients just as they do for a hundred. I dread
working on an important file on an airplane, knowing a computer crash might
cost me the entire trip's work. 

John Weinshel
Datagrace
Vashon Island, WA
(206) 463-1634
Associate Member, Filemaker Business Alliance
Certified For Filemaker 11


________________________________________
From: FileMaker Pro Discussions [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Lee
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 6:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Simple question, I hope (add)

Sorry,
Filemaker version is 8.5 v2. The full server software is way too expensive
for this office in that only a maximum of 3 access machines will be
required. The peer to peer option using a separate computer as the server
seemed an option. Although I don't know any real advantage other than the
machine will be on all the time whereas at the moment the host machine is
only switched on each morning allowing the other 2 machines to access the
solution. The solution is currently backed up on closing to the host hard
drive with two backups one each to the other two machines.
In this situation, I think the only real advantage is that the solution is
running all the time on the 'server' without having to start up the current
host each morning. Sometimes the user of one of the other two machines has
to open the primary host before they can start work. Having the solution
running all the time on the 'server' would save this need.
I guess its no different to running 4 computers peer to peer but never
turning the host off.

Lee


On 11/09/10 10:57 AM, Lee wrote: 
 Hi, 

We have 3 computers in our office all running a filemaker solution using one
computer as the host. It has been suggested that we get a server and if we
do, can we use the server as the 'host' machine for the other 3 to use our
filemaker solution. I keep thinking that while it may sound logical there is
probably a reason not to do it. 

Any thoughts ? 

--