[AccessD] OLE DB being retired

Is it any coincidence that Denali is an anagram for Denial?

David Emerson
Dalyn Software Ltd
New Zealand

At 12/09/2011, Jim Lawrence wrote:
>I will give you credit for the correct choices but I have always been a
>sucker for raw speed...
>
>A friend, who just retired from his carpentry business, would always say,
>"You know as well as I do there is no substitute for horse-power."
>
>Jim
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Stuart McLachlan
>Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 2:59 PM
>To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>Subject: Re: [AccessD] OLE DB being retired
>
>I must be psychic.  That's four in a row where I made the right decision not
>to follow MS up a
>blind alley  <g>
>
>I stayed with DAO instead of ADODB
>I stayed away from ADPs
>I stayed away from DAPs
>I stayed with ODBC/Native Client instead of OLEDB
>
>(actually 5 if you include .Net <g>)
>
>--
>Stuart
>
>
>On 11 Sep 2011 at 10:03, Mark Simms wrote:
>
> > Just when you thought the craziness at MSFT had stopped:
> >
> > Rohan Lam, the Program Manager for SQL Server Connectivity, has
> > officially stated that the next version of SQL Server,Denali, will be
> > the last that will support OLE DB. The SQL Server OLE DB provider will
> > then be deprecated in favour of SQL Server Native Client ODBC. In
> > seven years' time OLE DB will be a dead, unsupported technology for
> > SQL Server. What does one read into this remarkable handbrake-turn?
> > Microsoft still publishes White Papers exhorting us to abandon ODBC in
> > favour of OLE DB. Is it is now time to abandon OLE DB?
> >
> > www.sqlservercentral.com
> >