Jürgen Welz
jwelz at hotmail.com
Sun Feb 22 11:52:39 CST 2004
I did a little file list demo a couple years ago that MTM might take a look at. Just starting with 2003 which I neither own nor have installed on any machine I can get my hands on. It is installed on a security hypochondriac's terminal server to which I will obtain a login later next week. If any addins are needed, it will probably be a struggle. Very likely no VBA help will be installed so if and when object dependencies arise, it will be something I may have to address. There are 20 concurrent users and 6 may open two instances of the same database at the same time, all at the end of 6 dsl connections to different offices. Ten of the users share a single dsl connection. Six laptops will need to synchronize files (11 gigabytes are managed by the system) and data (BE sits at 19 megabytes at present). There will be no replication tools. A great many people are not moving to .NET. Look at www.mvps.org and you'll see little mention of it. VB 6 is not about to expire and there is little need to expose mature objects in MS Office applications to modification at the root levels. There was a period of time where I believed that I would need to learn C++ or Java to do programming from the ground up but it looks like Microsoft has taken much of the best from both of these to build a newer and somewhat more mature Javaesqe language. That is not to say I would want to build a replacement for Word as there is so little sense in doing so. There is a world of difference between building your own object heirarchy and using a mature documented and well understood object model. The transition to .NET requires a large investment in understanding and developing object hierarchies before writing any code. With VB and VBA it was relatively safe to dive in once the tables were designed. An acquaintance told me a story of an impossible development task with a ridiculous delivery date. He had to deliver a .NET application in a few weeks and he firmly believed that the task was impossible given the time constraints. Rather than panic, he decided to work with the schedule and devote time to planning the hierarchy and overall structure believing that if he documented his work, he would demonstrate to his employer that he worked hard but the task was impossible. He was shocked to find that he completed the project with time to spare. I don't have that comfort with .NET. There are times when I live and breathe code and there have been many times where I would have to go to excessive lengths to get Access to do what I wanted and as a result, I'm finding that .NET is a pretty good fit. I believe users need drag and drop and more flexible formatting in lists, combos and continuous forms. When I look at what I've done in ASP in the past and do the comparison with ASP.NET and how learning VB.NET yeilds returns in that area as well, I'm convinced that learning .NET will give me a good return on my investment. I have also heard from numerous acquaintances that many of the jobs that are offered require either open source or .NET experience. Every fundamental concept I learned about Java translates well to .NET. If I had to guess at the future, I would see VB/A surviving as a kind of power user programming language and a new crop of programmers steeped in UML and object hierarchy design since their teens that will embrace the true object oriented languages. Ciao Jürgen Welz Edmonton, Alberta jwelz at hotmail.com >From: "Susan Harkins" <ssharkins at bellsouth.net> > > Susan is too busy to post those "impossible" questions which did catalyze >threads with 100+ messages. > >===========I apologize for all my failings. :) > >I have been busy -- working on my third book with Mike G since fall. >Nothing >this crowd will be interested in though I don't think. :) An interesting >one >will be out next month and I'll be glad to talk about it then -- cause I'd >like to get this crowd's reaction to the whole move. > >I've been using Outlook 2003 and there are things that just don't work that >seem to work for other people -- I have no clue what's wrong with it (aside >from my incompetence in this area). :( For instance, the new AutoComplete >feature uses names from my Outlook Express address book instead of the >Outlook contacts I've entered. It did that before I imported the address >book from OE. I imported it, but Outlook still won't read names entered as >contacts--it only uses the names in my original OE address book. Truly >strange. But overall, I like it better than OE, even if it is still a >memory >hog. If anyone's using the BCM and has some good documentation they could >point me to I'd be grateful. > >I don't have any articles for the next issue of MTM, so somebody needs to >get busy. :) > >I followed the article on Access becoming extinct and found it interesting >-- how many of you are actually using or supporting Access 2003? > >I'm curious if any of you are actually using any of the new features like >the Object Dependencies task pane and so on. I have to upgrade each time, >but at this point, publishers are wanting to cover up to 4 versions in one >article -- I tell them, "no, but thank you for asking..." ;) Collaboration >seems to be the big push and I just don't have any need for it personally, >but that is the push so my guess is a large part of the user base wants it. >We don't need no stinkin' smart tags... ;) > >How many of you are moving to .NET? Seems like the next frontier, but I may >not go west. ;) I'm getting to old to keep up. ;) I'll be working with >basics, but I can't imagine ever taking it on at a development level. I >don't like working that hard. Unlike so many of you, this is just something >I do to make money, not something I'm passionate about. I don't code in my >sleep -- unless I'm having a nightmare. :) > >Shouldn't TechEd be just around the corner? Anyone going? I haven't been in >years. > >Susan H. _________________________________________________________________ Say “good-bye” to spam, viruses and pop-ups with MSN Premium -- free trial offer! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200359ave/direct/01/