Future of access?

  • Thread starter Thread starter John
  • Start date Start date
J

John

Hi

What future does access have after the release of vs 2005/sql 2005? MS
doesn't seem to have done anything major with access lately and presumably
hoping that everyone migrates to vs/sql.

Any comments?

Thanks

Regards
 
What future does access have after the release of vs 2005/sql
2005? MS doesn't seem to have done anything major with access
lately and presumably hoping that everyone migrates to vs/sql.
Click to expand...

Have you tried checking Google Groups for this newsgroup to see if
this topic has been discussed before?

Free clue: massive discussion of the topic within the last month.

Free hint: you look not very bright when you ask obvious questions
like this without having checked the archives.
 
John said:
What future does access have after the release of vs 2005/sql 2005? MS
doesn't seem to have done anything major with access lately and presumably
hoping that everyone migrates to vs/sql.

Any comments?
Click to expand...

First, ms-access makes a great front end to sql server. So, you kind of have
to consider ms-access a developers tool like c++, or VB, or vb.net.

Remember, with sql server, or oracle, you can't create a form, or even a
user interface. So, if you move to sql server, what will you make the forms
with?

ms-access is primarily a developer tool that lets you build a interface. You
can build this interface, and connect to the JET engine, or connect to sql
server. Thus, you really can't outgrow ms-access in terms of users. It
would be wrong to think as ms-access as a database (it is not). Ms-access is
a tool that lets you build applications, and lets you CONNECT to a database
engine of your choice. So, if you got a oracle database, ms-access is still
a great tool to use, and connect to that database.

As for new features? Well, each version of ms-access tends to bring us along
for the Microsoft ride for technology. When class objects became all rage in
programming circles, we got that feature added to access 97.

You can read about class objects and why you would use them here:
http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/WhyClass.html

When Microsoft came out with ADO (active data objects), then for access
2000, we got ado added to ms-access. When ms-access 2002 came along, XML was
all the rage, and we got even better support for XML in access 2003. And,
access 2003 also let you use share point services.

Further, while you can't write web services in ms-access, you can certainly
CONSUME web services. The reason why you can do this is that Microsoft
released the soap add in tool kit for ms-access. So, if you want to use .net
services via SOAP, or use things like XML...you now can. Hence, you can
consume .net web services with ms-access. So, from a developers point of
view, ms-access gets most of the new technologies that Microsoft comes out
with. They have consistently for the last 10 years added new technologies
to ms-access that they are using for building software.

If you look at the above additions to ms-access, you can clearly see that as
Microsoft comes out with new technologies, they have been adding them to
ms-access. And, if you think about the above features, MOST are not actual
database features, but simply additions to what developers would expect with
a developers tool.

So, I never really thought of ms-access as a database, and the fact that you
can (and should) choose the appropriate database engine for your task at
hand never really changed the fact that you can use ms-access with your
database of choice.

If you want to pick oracle as your database, you can. However, you
can't build a form with a oracle database..and you can with ms-access.

So, you most certainly
can use ms-access to build the application, and use oracle as the database
for this ms-access application. ms-access is thus a tool to 'access' a
database, but ms-access is not really a database.

As for other new features in a2003 that I like and use? Well, you can change
the font size in the sql view (I really like that feature). Another feature
is ms-access now supports themed controls. This makes your "old" software
kind of look new. Here is some screen shots of old vs new. (the only thing
done was turn on themes).

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Atheme/index.htm

There is some more screen shots here:

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/UseAbility/UserFriendly.htm

Another feature is automatic
error checking for common errors in forms and reports.
Error checking points out errors, such as two controls
using the same keyboard shortcut, and the width of a report
being greater than the page it will be printed on.
Enabling error checking helps you identify errors and
correct them.

The Smart tag help appears in reprot desing also is nice.

And, when you change a field property in the table design, you can have
that change prorogate thought out the application (forms and reports will be
updated to reflect this change).

There is a bunch of other features I don't care...nor use in a2003. However
Microsoft continues to work on the next great version, and if the above
history is any indication of the path of the product, then we will continue
to see new features..and new that MS comes out with integrated into that
developers product.
 
..and new that MS comes out with integrated into that
developers product.

Should read:

and that as MS comes out with new things, they are integrated into
ms-access.
 
The future of Access for whom?

If you are talking about secretaries and the like, then quite probably the
next version of Access will be much more better; expecially when it comes to
its integration with Office and Sharepoint. For exemple, I won't be
surprised if there are a better way of doing a mail merge between Word and
Access or to integrate data from Access into a word document. The actual
interface between Access and Word is very ineffective and there a lot of
ameliorations to make there.

Probably that there will be also a lot of other small ameliorations, like
maybe an easy way of printing multiple reports into a single document, the
possibility of writing comments inside queries, to add fields not from the
recordset to a continuous forms and other things like that.

However, for the developers of enterprise solutions; Access seems now to
have become a dead-end.
 
"Sylvain Lafontaine" <sylvain aei ca (fill the blanks, no spam
please) said:
However, for the developers of enterprise solutions; Access seems now to
have become a dead-end.
Click to expand...

In what sense?

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
 
However, for the developers of enterprise solutions; Access seems now to
have become a dead-end.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think ms-access every was a enterprise solution anyway.
However, do remember that 99% of business in the USA is a small business.
So, while you can get all wound up about big business, they don't represent
any sizeable factor here. So, while enterprise solutions represents 1% of
the business market, ms-access will happily cover the 99% part. Point in
fact, this means the enterprise market never was large, and never was part
of ms-access anyway.

However, for most business, in fact 99% of business out there ms-access is a
ideal tool for software development. And, in fact 99% of business will NOT
outgrow ms-access. Even if you got 50-75 users, ms-access + sql server is a
great solution, and will not even break out in a sweat with such low numbers
of users.

However, for sure, for the larger enterprise development (that represents 1%
of business in the market), those larger business were never using ms-access
for enterprise solutions anyway. I don't think those enterprise solution
providers should be holding their breath for the next version of ms-access
to come out and grab that 1% that ms-access never represented in the first
place.
 
Excerpt for the SQL part, the development of fancy stuff in Access are
mainly based on three things: VBA, Recordsets and ActiveX (COM/DCOM).

Essentially, Microsoft has stopped support for VB6, ASP and DTS; which means
that outside of Access and Office, that are no longer any
support/development/use for languages closely related to VBA, ie: VB and
VBScript. (Of course, I have put apart VB.NET for obvious reasons.)

This also means that outside of Access/Office, support, development and use
of the Recordsets technology is also practically stopped.

Finally, the end of VB6 also means that they is no any longer any way for
the easy creation of COM components. Of course, if you don't need them,
then this won't bother you; however, for those situations where you don't
have the choice - for exemple when you have to interface with an existing
library with no available ActiveX components - then you are now stuck to go
the C++/ATL way; which is far from being an easy way for a newbie.

Seriously, would you suggest to a newcomer, someone who doesn't know VBA,
ADO, ATL and the .NET Framework and who doesn't have to support a legacy
application, to start learning these things instead of VB.NET, C# and
ADO.NET ?

It appears that VBA, Recordsets and COM are now on an isolated island and
that this island will become more and more isolated in a fast way.
 
SL> Seriously, would you suggest to a newcomer, someone who doesn't know
SL> VBA, ADO, ATL and the .NET Framework and who doesn't have to support a
SL> legacy application, to start learning these things instead of VB.NET,
SL> C# and ADO.NET ?

Depends on his purpose. If it is productive creating workhorse applications
with great performance, then yes. If being in sync with glossy magazines,
plus impressing job interviewers who know things from those magazines, then
no.

Vadim Rapp
 
Per "Sylvain Lafontaine said:
Seriously, would you suggest to a newcomer, someone who doesn't know VBA,
ADO, ATL and the .NET Framework and who doesn't have to support a legacy
application, to start learning these things instead of VB.NET, C# and
ADO.NET ?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. I don't need or want any more competition in my (to me, at
least) lucrative niche of providing low-cost, quickly-delivered solutions for
clients who need same. -)

VB.NET *really* eats up the manhours.
 
"Sylvain Lafontaine" <sylvain aei ca (fill the blanks, no spam
please)> wrote in
Excerpt for the SQL part, the development of fancy stuff in Access
are mainly based on three things: VBA, Recordsets and ActiveX
(COM/DCOM).
Click to expand...

What the *hell* do you mean by "recordsets"? EVERY database
application will be operating on recordsets of one form or another.
 
By "recordsets", I'm referring to the DAO and ADO implementations of
recordsets in comparaison with the datasets of the .NET framework. In
ADO.NET, the recordsets are so different from their DAO and ADO counterparts
that MS has changed their name to Dataset.

My statement about "recordsets" may look strange at first but if you take a
look at ADO.NET, the answer will become obvious. This is why I didn't give
any further explanation in my other post.
 
"Sylvain Lafontaine" <sylvain aei ca (fill the blanks, no spam
please)> wrote in
By "recordsets", I'm referring to the DAO and ADO implementations
of recordsets in comparaison with the datasets of the .NET
framework. In ADO.NET, the recordsets are so different from their
DAO and ADO counterparts that MS has changed their name to
Dataset.

My statement about "recordsets" may look strange at first but if
you take a look at ADO.NET, the answer will become obvious. This
is why I didn't give any further explanation in my other post.
Click to expand...

You sound a lot like a garden-variety moron who selects the most
recent Microsoft technology just because Microsoft says it's coming
next. Those who did that with ADO after the release of Access 2000
got badly burned, so I think it highly unlikely that any experienced
Access developer would be anxious to start on whatever Microsoft
says is the latest and greatest, and that includes all the .NET
lunacy, which really isn't designed for the same problem space in
which Access excels.
 
Just in case you didn't know, you're not obligated to take part in this
discussion.
 
Well just to add my 2 cents, having been programming in C#.Net for the last
8 months or so..

The "dataset" in .Net is not equivalent to a recordset at all. A dataset
can, however, contain several datatables, each of which is more like the
disconnected recordset idea. You fill a datatable with data from a query or
stored procedure. After optionally manipulating the data in a datatable, it
can be used to update the data in the database.

Anne


Sylvain Lafontaine said:
By "recordsets", I'm referring to the DAO and ADO implementations of
recordsets in comparaison with the datasets of the .NET framework. In
ADO.NET, the recordsets are so different from their DAO and ADO
counterparts that MS has changed their name to Dataset.

My statement about "recordsets" may look strange at first but if you take
a look at ADO.NET, the answer will become obvious. This is why I didn't
give any further explanation in my other post.
Click to expand...
 
David W. Fenton wrote:
"You sound a lot like a garden-variety moron who selects the most
recent Microsoft technology just because Microsoft says it's coming
next. Those who did that with ADO after the release of Access 2000
got badly burned...."
--
I started to use ADO in 1998. I have not been burned with ADO. I do not
know of anyone who has been burned with ADO. I invite all ADO burnees
to state the nature of their burns and the specific ADO causes of them
here in CDMA.

Learning a new technology can be frustrating and time consuming. These,
together with a notion that I may wish to leave Microsoft programs,
have deterred me from advancing very far into the .NET technolgies. But
I expect that should I do so, I will find many strengths and
advantages.

I think it is fair to beginners who use this group to avoid denigrating
technologies which I have not used extensively.
 
There is a future for Access, VBA, DAO, ADO *and* .Net products. Technology
is so prevalent in so many types of organizations, with so many different
needs, that there is room and a need for the full range of technologies, old
and new.

I question the experience of anyone who thinks that the most popular desktop
database in the world is going die out in the near future, or that VBA is
dead.

I question the experience of anyone that does not realize the potential in
learning and implementing the latest Microsoft's latest technologies, such
as .Net.

I know of some very high-end sophisticated work being built on Access, but
also of some very sophisticated clients who require the use of .Net for
product development.

And then there is Visual FoxPro which still has a good, dedicated developers
base. This is old technology that was suppose to die out years ago. The
most resent version (VFP 9) was just released, and includes new reporting
technology that is not even included in any of Microsoft's other product
lines. Go figure.

Steven R. Zuch
Cogent Management Inc.
 
I've read a lot on this subject, a subject that I'm kind of bummed
about, but can't figure out if I missed the one you're
mentioning...care to state the starting date and title of the
discussion? Was it in this newsgroup? Just looked via google and didn't
find anything that fit the bill, or at least what I expected (the
massive part).
 
I've read a lot on this subject, a subject that I'm kind of bummed
about, but can't figure out if I missed the one you're
mentioning...care to state the starting date and title of the
discussion? Was it in this newsgroup? Just looked via google and didn't
find anything that fit the bill, or at least what I expected (the
massive part).
Click to expand...

The subject was 'Is Microsoft phasing out Access?'
watch for line wrap:
http://groups.google.ca/group/comp....55/5b615daf679318cb?tvc=1&en#5b615daf679318cb
 
Back
Top