Why isn't there a category for MSAccess
-
So, it's not a Database? It wouldn't fit inside the database section for instance? It deserves more privileges than SQL Server, Oracle, etc?
-
Even the VB category is mostly for VB.Net not for VB6. I can understand that VB6 is over a decade old and everyone thinks it's old hat, but Access keeps on going with more releases every so often. As far as I know the latest version is MSAccess 2013. It's viable and I have written some programs for myself and others that we can't live without. So come on guys. Give us desktop database managers a place. Have a heart!
Oh please give him an Access forum, then Access questions won't pollute the database forum and we can all ignore it. Except of course those who actually make a living from building on that platform. And yes I went from SuperBase to Access in the 90s and then to SQL Server, I have never gone back and do not regret the moves!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Even the VB category is mostly for VB.Net not for VB6. I can understand that VB6 is over a decade old and everyone thinks it's old hat, but Access keeps on going with more releases every so often. As far as I know the latest version is MSAccess 2013. It's viable and I have written some programs for myself and others that we can't live without. So come on guys. Give us desktop database managers a place. Have a heart!
I had quite a bit of fun and a little agony creating databases which are indistinguishable from full blooded database applications. I found it very easy to develop beautiful interfaces which gave just as much or as little access to the underlying db structure as I do with ASP.Net and WPF. All well structured companies need products that can meet the needs of low budget customers so MS Access is likely to be around for a while, buy there are no real changes going on for the platform and there are already many resources out there for it and they already have much more to offer than would accumulate quickly here. You are better off using those resources.
-
Even the VB category is mostly for VB.Net not for VB6. I can understand that VB6 is over a decade old and everyone thinks it's old hat, but Access keeps on going with more releases every so often. As far as I know the latest version is MSAccess 2013. It's viable and I have written some programs for myself and others that we can't live without. So come on guys. Give us desktop database managers a place. Have a heart!
Because all the crazy CP members are in the Lounge, not out creating forums.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Because Access, like VB, sucks big hairy donkey schlongs.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013if you think access is bad you obviously never used DataEase, what a wonderful system that was a relational database that allowed MULTIPLE unique keys, you would think that naming the key unique would have given them a hint that there should be only one, wouldn't you!
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-
if you think access is bad you obviously never used DataEase, what a wonderful system that was a relational database that allowed MULTIPLE unique keys, you would think that naming the key unique would have given them a hint that there should be only one, wouldn't you!
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
Well, mathematically, uniqueness always refers to a specific set of elements. I can therefore easily imagine definitions of overlapping sets with multiple keys that are all unique within their own set of reference, but not within the union of all elements of all sets. To give an example: number plates on cars are guaranteed to be unique within the country that issued them. However, there may be identical alphanumeric sequences that are valid number plates in different countries. Since in many countries number plates do not (always) contain country codes, you'd need multiple keys, that are only locally unique. That said, I agree you should name those keys appropriately, e. g. LUID (as opposed to GUID). :cool:
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
-
I bet you cannot write a Clippy Add-On for Lotus Notes in AccessVB.
Now that is both cruel and mean - I couldn't write that in any language for the sheer physical pain both Clippy and Lotus Notes give me! X|
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
-
Well, mathematically, uniqueness always refers to a specific set of elements. I can therefore easily imagine definitions of overlapping sets with multiple keys that are all unique within their own set of reference, but not within the union of all elements of all sets. To give an example: number plates on cars are guaranteed to be unique within the country that issued them. However, there may be identical alphanumeric sequences that are valid number plates in different countries. Since in many countries number plates do not (always) contain country codes, you'd need multiple keys, that are only locally unique. That said, I agree you should name those keys appropriately, e. g. LUID (as opposed to GUID). :cool:
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
we are not talking user defined fields but the internal unique key assigned to a record, PKid in the vernacular, a system defined seeded auto incrementing Int and yet you could still end up with duplicates
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-
we are not talking user defined fields but the internal unique key assigned to a record, PKid in the vernacular, a system defined seeded auto incrementing Int and yet you could still end up with duplicates
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
Ouch, I see your point. Reminds me: "How can you trust a man that wears both a belt and suspenders? Man can't even trust his own pants." (Once upon a Time in the west)
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
-
Even the VB category is mostly for VB.Net not for VB6. I can understand that VB6 is over a decade old and everyone thinks it's old hat, but Access keeps on going with more releases every so often. As far as I know the latest version is MSAccess 2013. It's viable and I have written some programs for myself and others that we can't live without. So come on guys. Give us desktop database managers a place. Have a heart!
