ODBC Comeback?
-
After reading this article: http://reddevnews.com/blogs/print.aspx?blog=3654 I'm wondering why MS is slowing down on the .NET functionality. The article states: "If they [Microsoft] were trying to kill ODBC, they would have added this functionality to their .NET provider." Huh. I thought ODBC was a thing of the past and only used on legacy systems now. Should I start reverting back to ODBC drivers instead of the built in .NET stuff? Any thought?
-
After reading this article: http://reddevnews.com/blogs/print.aspx?blog=3654 I'm wondering why MS is slowing down on the .NET functionality. The article states: "If they [Microsoft] were trying to kill ODBC, they would have added this functionality to their .NET provider." Huh. I thought ODBC was a thing of the past and only used on legacy systems now. Should I start reverting back to ODBC drivers instead of the built in .NET stuff? Any thought?
Jim in Arizona wrote:
I'm wondering why MS is slowing down on the .NET functionality.
How do you get that from the article?
Jim in Arizona wrote:
I thought ODBC was a thing of the past and only used on legacy systems now.
Where do you get that info? ODBC is still a perfectly valid method of data access, and probably still the best performing cross-DBMS access interface. I've never seen anything from Microsoft stating ODBC is deprecated, dead, or dying.
Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:
-
Jim in Arizona wrote:
I'm wondering why MS is slowing down on the .NET functionality.
How do you get that from the article?
Jim in Arizona wrote:
I thought ODBC was a thing of the past and only used on legacy systems now.
Where do you get that info? ODBC is still a perfectly valid method of data access, and probably still the best performing cross-DBMS access interface. I've never seen anything from Microsoft stating ODBC is deprecated, dead, or dying.
Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:
-
Jim in Arizona wrote:
I'm wondering why MS is slowing down on the .NET functionality.
How do you get that from the article?
Jim in Arizona wrote:
I thought ODBC was a thing of the past and only used on legacy systems now.
Where do you get that info? ODBC is still a perfectly valid method of data access, and probably still the best performing cross-DBMS access interface. I've never seen anything from Microsoft stating ODBC is deprecated, dead, or dying.
Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:
My opinion of ODBC not being used as much anymore (rather than depricated) is because of articles I've been reading over the last few years saying that other, newer methods are preferred due to speed (for one) and ODBC should ONLY be used for those systems that require it, such as older legacy systems. I stopped using ODBC about four years ago in favor of ADO/ADO.NET. Looking around the net, the consensus appears to be that ODBC is old and slow compared to the others. http://www.experts-exchange.com/Databases/Q\_20985045.html That being the case, why would they (MS) begin working on it again instead of spending that time on ADO.NET? Also, why would anyone, assuming ADO.NET is faster/better, want to design a NEW system with ODBC? So, if ODBC is better and should be used instead of ADO.NET, then this is the first I've heard of it.
-
My opinion of ODBC not being used as much anymore (rather than depricated) is because of articles I've been reading over the last few years saying that other, newer methods are preferred due to speed (for one) and ODBC should ONLY be used for those systems that require it, such as older legacy systems. I stopped using ODBC about four years ago in favor of ADO/ADO.NET. Looking around the net, the consensus appears to be that ODBC is old and slow compared to the others. http://www.experts-exchange.com/Databases/Q\_20985045.html That being the case, why would they (MS) begin working on it again instead of spending that time on ADO.NET? Also, why would anyone, assuming ADO.NET is faster/better, want to design a NEW system with ODBC? So, if ODBC is better and should be used instead of ADO.NET, then this is the first I've heard of it.
Cool. I just don't see the comparison being all that valid anyway: One can't use ADO.NET in native code. Of course, with years of .NET marketing implying .NET is the end-all be-all of programming frameworks and native code is dead... And ADO.NET faster than ODBC? hmmm For all DBMSs and drivers? I'm skeptical, but I really don't care - all the DB stuff is a bottleneck anyway. It's the progress in the dev tools for .NET, with pretty much no progress in native tools, that makes ADO.NET, and .NET in general, more appealing to me. BTW, I converted all my DB code to ADO.NET from ODBC a while ago, so I'm not an ODBC fanatic....I'm just saying it's not dead :)
Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:
-
My opinion of ODBC not being used as much anymore (rather than depricated) is because of articles I've been reading over the last few years saying that other, newer methods are preferred due to speed (for one) and ODBC should ONLY be used for those systems that require it, such as older legacy systems. I stopped using ODBC about four years ago in favor of ADO/ADO.NET. Looking around the net, the consensus appears to be that ODBC is old and slow compared to the others. http://www.experts-exchange.com/Databases/Q\_20985045.html That being the case, why would they (MS) begin working on it again instead of spending that time on ADO.NET? Also, why would anyone, assuming ADO.NET is faster/better, want to design a NEW system with ODBC? So, if ODBC is better and should be used instead of ADO.NET, then this is the first I've heard of it.
You're assuming that the technologies are mutually exclusive, whilst I'm not even sure that they are really competing technologies. ODBC puts it priority in talking to as much databases as it can, whilst ADO puts it's coins on speed. ADO.NET is the speedy version that has been integrated in our favorite framework. Nah, ODBC ain't dead. The BDE is dead, and I think that we should be gratefull for that :)
I are troll :)