[AccessD] Basic Question (Probably) that I just don't know

[Jim Dettman]

Bill,

  A lot of people who use Access simply didn't know any better.

  Most assumed that because the DB was the same file format, then could use
any version on it and get the same results.

  That's never been true of course, but the features in A2010 that were
specific to it were easy to fall into using without realizing it.  So when
you went back to A2007, it was more of an issue than in the past.

Jim.
-----Original Message-----
From: AccessD [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of
Bill Benson
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 03:10 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Basic Question (Probably) that I just don't know

RE: " using 2010 and
then trying to drop back to 2007."

Who in their right mind does that??!

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Jim Dettman <jimdettman at verizon.net>
wrote:

> David,
>
>  Not sure if you consider A2010 "good" or not, but A2010 was the last
> version that had support for ADP's, replication, .DBF's, and JET 3.x.
> Here's the list of everything that was dropped starting with A2013:
>
> https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Discontinued-
> features-and-modified-
> functionality-in-Access-2013-BC006FC3-5B48-499E-8C7D-9A2DFEF68E2F
>
>  and FWIW, A2010 is pretty solid on the desktop side as long as you moving
> forward.  Most of the issues with it were related to folks using 2010 and
> then trying to drop back to 2007.
>
> Jim.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AccessD [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of
> David McAfee
> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 03:18 PM
> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Basic Question (Probably) that I just don't know
>
> Jim, I think you meant to say:
>  A2010 was the last good version of Access.
>
> Actually:
>  A2003 was the last good version of Access.  ;)
>
> I miss ADPs.
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Jim Dettman <jimdettman at verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> > <<
> > 1. Does Access still support replication?
> > >>
> >
> >  Starting with A2013, no.  A2010 was the last "full feature" version of
> > Access.  Replication was dropped along with ADP's.
> >
> > <<
> > 2. Why would a seasoned developer would choose an MDB or ACCDB back end
> > when so many actual database servers for free (SQL Express, MySQL,
> MariaDB,
> > PostGreSQL, SQLite... the list goes on),
> > >>
> >
> >  A seasoned developer probably would not.
> >
> >  Only thing I could think of is if someone wanted to take advantage of
> > something in ACE which is not in any other DB (say the attachment data
> > type), which is being driven by a customer requirement.
> >
> >  The other reasons might be data type incompatibility (i.e. the fun you
> can
> > have with floating point and bit fields), and last but not least, just
> ease
> > of use.   Even today, there is still a niche (now very small though)
> where
> > a
> > ACE DB BE might make sense.  Someone with no real IT staff, small
> > databases,
> > and small number of users.
> >
> >  But more often that not, some other BE is the way to go as you say.
> >
> > <<
> > One last thought: the port from an Access BE to a genuine server DB
> > facilitates the move to web/mobile apps, and that is a
> rapidly-increasing,
> > even dominant market segment. So Access developers have to be planning
an
> > Exit Strategy, since it is quite clear that MS has little or no interest
> in
> > providing one.
> > >>
> >
> >  I can't say much on that front other than to say pay attention to what
> is
> > being asked for on Access user voice:
> >
> > https://access.uservoice.com
> >
> >
> >  You'll find that what most are looking for is improvements in the
> desktop
> > and I think Microsoft is listening to that.  While some people are
> looking
> > for a web product, most seem to want enhancements in the desktop
product.
> >
> >  Web apps are certainly gaining ground, in many businesses it's still a
> > more
> > traditional approach to applications for back office work.
> >
> > Jim.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > AccessD mailing list
> > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com