Jim Dettman
jimdettman at verizon.net
Thu Nov 1 15:47:34 CDT 2012
Tina, <<but I'm thinking that until people learn to understand and follow a logic diagram they aren't going to succeed in assembling a "fully functional database" no matter how pretty Microsoft makes the user interface.>> But the rub is, you won't be able to build an app the way we think of something as an "app". The situation between back then and now is quite different. Back then significant developer level features were being added (richer event model, VBA, ADP's, replication, etc). You only need to look back at the Developers Handbook over the years. With each new publication, it consumed more and more pages finally ending up as a two volume set of 2400 pages for Access 2000 as proof of that. But now the focus has moved significantly towards the end user. Everything that is complicated to any extent is being simplified (multi-value fields, attachments, sub datasheets, lookup in table design, etc) as much as possible and all the powerful features (like VBA) that allow you to do different things are being removed or restricted. An Access web database is nothing more then simple CRUD operations and can easily be "fully functional" because there's not that much functionality there. Macro's only allowed and you should see the list of macro's that you can use; it's a very short list. Since 2007, I have seen nothing significantly new added for developers. In fact the last major developer feature added was the printer object in A2003. Some might argue that things like PDF output in 2007 was, but I see that as an end user feature (you can't control it programmatically at all). With things like the ribbon, it just makes our job that much more difficult. You loose too much screen real estate and programming ribbons with custom XML is a royal pain. Now 2013 hammers that home by not allowing old style toolbars at all and you must use the ribbon. I see that as a loss for developers. Personally, the writing has been on the wall for quite some time. Microsoft is aiming Access to be squarely in the end user camp and much more so then they have in the past. I don't believe the Access as we know it (a product that can do way more then it was ever supposed to be able to do) will be around all that much longer. One other quote from the section on converting ADP's: "Upgrade to the .NET Framework - Your application may be complex enough that to consider moving to a professional development platform such as the .NET Framework. SQL Server is designed to make it easier for you to use your existing database infrastructure you've already created and extend the functionality of your application without having to significantly rewrite your code." Jim. -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Tina Norris Fields Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 03:27 PM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: Re: [AccessD] Regarding multi-value field, from a reader Well, yeah, but that's what they said about Access way back when they first introduced it. They marketed it as a simple desktop toy that non-programmer types would be able to use by pointing and clicking their way to a fully functional database. How many times have we been called in to repair one of those "fully functional" databases put together by someone who believed the hype and had no concept of what is really needed for a database? So, maybe we won't be in the picture much longer, but I'm thinking that until people learn to understand and follow a logic diagram they aren't going to succeed in assembling a "fully functional database" no matter how pretty Microsoft makes the user interface. T Tina Norris Fields tinanfields at torchlake.com 231-322-2787 On 11/1/2012 3:06 PM, Jim Dettman wrote: > If you haven't figured it out, we (developers) are not going to be in the > picture much longer. > > Microsoft just released details on Office and Access 2013: > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj162978(v=office.15).aspx > > Couple of quotes: > > "A new interactive view designer makes it easy for users who have little or > no programming experience to build apps. " > "A new application model enables subject matter experts to quickly create > and share applications that can be used to run their business. " > > They are focused on the end user and nothing but and everything is about > the cloud and Office 365. Traditional desktop development with Access is > out. > > Here's a list of what got pulled out: > > http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc178954%28v=office.15%29.aspx; > > > Two biggies from that: > > 1. Access 2003 toolbars and command bars are no longer supported. You > *must* use the ribbon. > 2. ADP's are gone. > > And there's a bunch of other stuff, like Pivot Charts. > > Jim. > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Tina Norris > Fields > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 02:52 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Regarding multi-value field, from a reader > > Well, for what it's worth, I agree with everybody who said don't use > multi-value fields! Geez, we go to lots of trouble to normalize our > data and then Access arrives with new specialties that at least look > like the destruction of normalization! Dang! > T > > Tina Norris Fields > tinanfields at torchlake.com > 231-322-2787 > > On 10/31/2012 7:08 PM, Susan Harkins wrote: >> Received the following from a reader: >> >> "I set up a multivalued field in Access 2010 using a List Box and >> providing a Value List with values M,T,W,R,F. Everything works fine >> but for one problem. When I chose M, W, F from my list, th >> emultivalued filed reads F, M, W ... i.e., the entries are sorted left >> to right whereas I want them to show up as M, W, F. Is there a way to >> do this?" >> >> =====Other than learning the basics so I could write about them, I >> don't use them and have almost no experience. Anyone have a quick and >> easy answer? I'm going to do a little research, but if anybody knows, >> please share! >> >> Thanks! >> Susan H. -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com