[AccessD] Friday/weekend scaring reading: Wikipedia and JET

Hi Dan

Thanks, but first I'm not so sure, second time doesn't allow.

I think Arthur has the right approach. Cumulative efforts from our list - as Arthur suggests -could probably be the best way to have the article rewritten. I will happily give my input to this, but to be honest I think several among us know more about the finer details of JET, indeed those who own and have read the book about JET which I have the impression carry true facts only.

First thing to do would be to split up the content, like:

  Overview
  History (for example: When and how did Rushmore arrive)
  Evolution
  Technique, capabilities, compatibility, limitations
  Programming, language
  True and false (let's kill all the bad talk and rumours once and for all)
  Upgrade options (SQL Server engine and CE)
  Future (JET was given a second life with Access 2007)
  
What about the author of that book? Is he/she around? Could be a splendid source and/or contributor.

/gustav

>>> dwaters at usinternet.com 15-02-2008 17:49 >>>
Gustav,

I think you could modify the Wikipedia entry to be correct!

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com 
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Gustav Brock
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 3:44 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com 
Subject: [AccessD] Friday/weekend scaring reading: Wikipedia and JET

Hi all - or perhaps indeed our JET specialist, Jim Dettman

Here is a scaring example that not everything in Wikipidia is to be trusted.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Jet_Database_Engine 

That entry is so full of confusing, mixed up and misleading facts and
incorrect version info that a major rewrite is requested. (My time doesn't
allow, sorry).
And why everything is written in preteritum and not presens as if JET has
passed away, I don't know.

For example, it fools around from paragraph one with JET, SQL Server and SQL
Server Compact Edition - and states that SQL was introduced in "later
versions".
And if you stand reading through this mess, at the end the author claims
transactions to be introduced in JET version 4.0.

Much can be said about JET but it certainly deserves a more trustworthy
description.

/gustav