Stuart McLachlan
stuart at lexacorp.com.pg
Tue Nov 8 15:17:14 CST 2011
Other than the fact that it's a bloated PITA and there are much better development environments out there? :-) -- Stuart On 9 Nov 2011 at 10:10, newsgrps wrote: > Thanks. Looks like I have no excuse not to jump into the world of dot net :-) > > At 9/11/2011, Charlotte Foust wrote: > >My last employer used Access or SQL Server backends for their commercial > >.Net product. Access was included for those clients who weren't ready to > >go full-blown SQL Server. There was no reason for Access to be installed > >on the machines at all because the Jet engine was already there and that's > >all that was required. > > > >Charlotte Foust > > > >On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 11:36 AM, newsgrps <newsgrps at dalyn.co.nz> wrote: > > > > > Thanks David, > > > > > > I am familiar with SQL and have 2000, 2005 and 2008 all installed. I was > > > thinking more of the end users and what they would need. > > > > > > Interesting concept about the Access back end. Does anyone have any > > > information on installing jet? If a user already have Access installed > > > will installing Jet cause problems? > > > > > > David > > > > > > > > > At 9/11/2011, David McAfee wrote: > > > > > >> You could always load SSCE (SQL Server Compact Edition) for > > >> testing/learning. > > >> > > >> As it is actually designed for compact devices (iPAQs/Phones) , it only > > >> allows one connection, but it is much less complicated than installing and > > >> dealing with full version SQL Server. It also doesn't suck the life out of > > >> your computer if you have an older/slower computer. > > >> > > >> You can think of it as installing JET and the SDF as an MDB (with no > > >> support for forms). > > >> > > >> You can you ClickOnce for deployment and even create a bootstrapper to > > >> check if SQL Server (or SSCE) is installed, if not it will install it for > > >> you. > > >> > > >> > > >> As for an actual program that you have to distribute, you can use an mdb > > >> if > > >> you prefer. > > >> You don't need the Access runtime unless you are planning on using Access > > >> as the FE. > > >> A .Net app can connect to the mdb back end without the runtime (although > > >> you WILL need Jet installed, but that shouldn't be an issue). > > >> > > >> HTH, > > >> David > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 11:04 AM, newsgrps <newsgrps at dalyn.co.nz> wrote: > > >> > > >> > This is sort of off topic but I will give it a shot. > > >> > > > >> > I am considering learning dot net and thought I would do a simple > > >> windows > > >> > application project that can be distributed that has a single table of > > >> > address information (perhaps being expanded to up to 5 tables). > > >> > > > >> > My reading indicates that I can create an installable package ok but I > > >> am > > >> > unsure about the database part. I have seen examples which use SQL > > >> Server > > >> > or Access but both of these seem overkill in this situation - likely > > >> users > > >> > will not have either of these installed and it seems crazy to include > > >> > runtime installations just for one table (or even if there were up to 5 > > >> > tables). > > >> > > > >> > Assuming that a similar application was created for actual distribution > > >> > what would be a suitable solution for storing the data in these > > >> > circumstances (or is a dot net application not the right tool for this > > >> job?) > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Regards > > >> > > > >> > David Emerson > > >> > Dalyn Software Ltd > > >> > Wellington, New Zealand > > -- > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com >