MartyConnelly
martyconnelly at shaw.ca
Tue Feb 20 17:34:41 CST 2007
Oracle and DB2 offer free similar scaled down products. William Hindman wrote: >Robert > >...msde's proved impractical because of scaling limitations MS built in >...so you're really only talking about SQL Express which is what, months >old? > >...and if your only problem with an Access be is corruption, then sorry, but >with the exception of cheap NICS I've not seen a corrupted mdb since A95 >...except in client's I took over from other developers and had to rebuild >...and thus corruption is not, in my environment, sufficient cause to spend >the time and money to convert to a non-JET be ...but I'll grant you that I'm >getting long in the tooth and damned reluctant to learn every new db wonder >cure that comes along. > >...and while I'm at it, I'll also admit that I'm developing a commercial app >based on a current client that will use a non-JET be because it needs to >scale to at least 50 users ...what that will be depends on some testing yet >to be accomplished but I'm not at all convinced that SQL Express isn't a >one-off dog & pony show for MS. > >William Hindman > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Robert L. Stewart" <rl_stewart at highstream.net> >To: <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> >Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:11 PM >Subject: Re: [AccessD] Code Library, Sample Database, Etc. > > > > >>William, >> >>PERSONAL OPINION FOLLOWING... >> >>With the advent of MSDE and SQL Express, Access as a BE >>should have disappeared. Even if you use an MDE against >>it. I have used Access since 1.0, co-authored a book on >>it for Access 97, and taught a Special Interest Group since >>1.0. Yes, with an extremely well designed front end and >>back end Access will work wonders. However, with the members >>of this group excluded, I have yet to see a really well >>designed combination of the two. There are simply too many >>people that think that is they can spell "Access Programmer," >>they are one. >> >>ADO and DAO are irrelevant. Pick your poison and use it. >>Where I work now, we use both. >> >>In my special interest group, we do not use Access for a BE. >>I have stopped teaching the use of it and only showing SQL >>Server. >> >>Biased, you bet. Too many corrupt data files over the years >>in Access. Never had one in SQL Server. And I have been >>using it since 3.21. :-) >> >>Robert >> >>P.S. >> >>Charlotte, I had my asbestos long johns on before I wrote it. :-) >>Fried or flamed, no problem. >> >> >>At 03:35 PM 2/20/2007, you wrote: >> >> >>>Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:23:44 -0500 >>>From: "William Hindman" <wdhindman at dejpolsystems.com> >>>Subject: Re: [AccessD] Code Library, Sample Database, Etc. >>>To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" >>> <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> >>>Message-ID: <001701c75524$a3de0a90$9258eb44 at 50NM721> >>>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; >>> reply-type=original >>> >>>Arthur >>> >>>...its not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing ...if you work in an >>>environment where SS is available and the notwork resources are available >>>to >>>support it, of course you would use SS in most applications. >>> >>>...but if you are a consultant working with many small businesses where >>>you >>>are it, then a well designed dao mdb fe/be can be highly stable and work >>>every bit as well as an adp/SS combo ...in point of fact with up to at >>>least >>>15 users a well designed dao based mdb will normally out perform an ado >>>based fe. >>> >>>...and with A'07 it appears that MS itself is moving back to the dao model >>>...what irks me is people declaring that their favorite model is best for >>>everyone ...or casting unwarranted aspersions on Access be's and dao when >>>they really don't work in an environment where that model functions best. >>> >>>William Hindman >>> >>> >>-- >>AccessD mailing list >>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com >>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd >>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com >> >> >> > > > > > > -- Marty Connelly Victoria, B.C. Canada