jwcolby
jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com
Sat Nov 14 16:59:58 CST 2009
I'm happy for you Stuart. I would no more try to sell you .Net than try to sell you Access. You obviously have your own environment that works for you. OTOH, I don't know of any environment other than .Net where you can choose several different languages that program to the same set of capabilities. Not to say that they don't exist, just that I don't know of any. I personally would prefer to use a single environment if that environment would do the job, than cobble together many different environments. Personally, I do not have the need for more than a single language. Most of my stuff is done in Access (to this point) but in the future most of my stuff will be done in .Net. I am absolutely sure that there is something that .net is not capable of or at least optimized for, but I haven't run into those situations. Just as an aside, I was not at all impressed with the .Net environment up until 2.0. Now I am very impressed, and I just see very nice improvements as time goes on. Stability is there, capability goes up. The same (VERY unfortunately) cannot be said for Access. Stability goes up and down, capability goes sideways. Usability goes up and down. There are a ton of programming languages Stuart. I used to be a Borland kind of guy. They had some slick and very powerful stuff. You have your preferences and I am not here to persuade you of anything other than that .net is quite powerful and capable. If you don't want to use it I understand and don't care. John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com Stuart McLachlan wrote: > But that's what I currently do all the time! I often need to use *more* that two differenent > languages in a single project. It's not unusual these days for me to need four. In the > majority of cases, Access is one of those components. I don't have a problem with this. It's > just that I don't need .Net to replace one or more of the other components. > > :-) >