Thank you, Microsoft
-
I used Access since it first came out. I still do at times. I switched to SQK Server after it came out, mostly because of the 32767 limit.
Access is a tool. Like any other tool, it has its purpose. Use it for the wrong purpose and one is destined for failure.
I agree with you one hundred percent! the same can be said for, and is equally true about VB in ALL of it's forms from VB6 to the latest version of VB.net. The same can be said for other languages, for that matter. I'm looking at you, Griff. Just because you like one language better than others, does not give you the right to rundown the others.
ED
Slow Eddie wrote:
I agree with you one hundred percent! the same can be said for, and is equally true about VB in ALL of it's forms from VB6 to the latest version of VB.net
Visual Basic was a revolutionary language that completely changed the programming landscape. I recall trying to develop GUIs prior to VB ... sheesh! Look at the "popular languages" lists -- regardless of the ranking criteria, Classic VB is often still in the top 20. Personally, this surprises me, but it's oddly true. Folks complain about the bad applications written in VB ... I've had to deal with far more crap code in C, C++, C#, and Java. As a mentor said, it's a poor craftsman who blames the tools for his lack of skill.
-
From my experience, I can see absolutely no reason to have that many columns. I got to look at BPCS, that the company used, and it was an absolute nightmare of a design, that I replicated some of with well-designed relational tables. I doubt I ever used many more than ten columns per a table, because there was absolutely no reason to do so if you normalize the data. But maybe I'm missing something.
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
In a properly designed 3rd normal form database, you are correct. You'd never get to 255 columns. I can only think of one situation where it would be useful to have >255 columns and that is denormalizing a dataset for ease of reporting. For example a clinical-trials reporting database.
-
This is not sarcasm, for once. I am doing a bunch of contacts. The ability to parse web page source text in an Access memo box, add the appropriate items to the DB, and keep track of the contact information in the DB (and, even though I haven't gotten there yet, being able in Outlook to open up Access and add the send and reply dates back into the DB from there (should be doable, but haven't tackled it yet)), is a MASSIVE help. Everyone seems to shit on Office and VBA, but when used correctly it is TREMENDOUSLY POWERFUL! A small business could be ran with it pretty easily if you coded it up nicely, and I haven't came across anything in VBA that forces you not to code it nicely. People complain about the cost of Office, but with Access, the power is amazing when you are aware of it. I still want to complain about the cost, but there is no way in hell I could single-handedly code a suite like that in less than twenty years; probably many many more! It is cheap for what you can get out of it. So thank you! (But don't take this as an excuse to raise prices - you've distributed the cost among enough of us - quit being greedy; profits don't have to increase each year. Just making a profit when so many people are struggling to live should be good enough.) But quit worrying about stupid icons so much, and eliminate that totally utterly stupid idea of forcing an MS account just to install Windows. Your corporate head honchos are bending over backwards to make a dystopian future where everyone is looked at as a number with a revenue stream associated with it. Quit it! Focus on improving the user experience! Like some of the flakiness of Word when pictures are moved around! And combining the Control Panel and the new Settings program! Based on how well you did with VBA and Office overall, and my praise thereof, YOU CAN DO IT!!! Best wishes for a continuously improving future!!! And Thanks Again!
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
You're probably better off using the free SQL Server express than Access. Also, Power BI is like Excel but with better and easier visualizations. With that said, MSN.com is really bad about censoring certain views on particular topics.
-
This is not sarcasm, for once. I am doing a bunch of contacts. The ability to parse web page source text in an Access memo box, add the appropriate items to the DB, and keep track of the contact information in the DB (and, even though I haven't gotten there yet, being able in Outlook to open up Access and add the send and reply dates back into the DB from there (should be doable, but haven't tackled it yet)), is a MASSIVE help. Everyone seems to shit on Office and VBA, but when used correctly it is TREMENDOUSLY POWERFUL! A small business could be ran with it pretty easily if you coded it up nicely, and I haven't came across anything in VBA that forces you not to code it nicely. People complain about the cost of Office, but with Access, the power is amazing when you are aware of it. I still want to complain about the cost, but there is no way in hell I could single-handedly code a suite like that in less than twenty years; probably many many more! It is cheap for what you can get out of it. So thank you! (But don't take this as an excuse to raise prices - you've distributed the cost among enough of us - quit being greedy; profits don't have to increase each year. Just making a profit when so many people are struggling to live should be good enough.) But quit worrying about stupid icons so much, and eliminate that totally utterly stupid idea of forcing an MS account just to install Windows. Your corporate head honchos are bending over backwards to make a dystopian future where everyone is looked at as a number with a revenue stream associated with it. Quit it! Focus on improving the user experience! Like some of the flakiness of Word when pictures are moved around! And combining the Control Panel and the new Settings program! Based on how well you did with VBA and Office overall, and my praise thereof, YOU CAN DO IT!!! Best wishes for a continuously improving future!!! And Thanks Again!
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
I'm not disputing the power of Access, VBA et al. For a given task or at least limited domain with a good plan it's powerful. The example you cited is the kind of thing it is most valuable for. The problem I've encountered a number of times is really a chain of issues that happens predictably, and Access gets the most heat from this situation. This is when powerful tools are readily available to users who happen to lack the training of a good database design, or application experience. In all cases these were smart people, who were in a hurry and didn't recognize the complexity of the tasks they were undertaking. The resulting issues blend and this pattern emerges in business and technical applications alike: > User with a need creates an application on [insert toolset here] etc on the desktop > The application fills the need nicely at first > Sometimes other users with similar needs recognize the power of the solution and start to use it too > All happens quietly without review or consideration from experienced IT staff or at least a knowledgeable Database expert. > Everyone is happy for a while (months, years...) because it just works. > Later we learn that the application is said to have run "really fast" when it was new. > Over time users forgot that the application was created entirely by "Dave in Engineering" or "Lucy in Underwriting" > Crisis happens - person/designer leaves | space runs out | computer fails > No one knew that person/designer had to [Insert task here] (e.g. "clean out the tables every couple of months to keep it running", "add new configurations") > No documentation, no source control, no backups > "Hey Fix This!" and our response is "What IS this? How long have you been using this?" I'm not exhagerating, and this pattern is my only real beef with Access. The price is secondary, but I'd say that if any company is willing to pay the cost of an Access license they should also put money into basic database design training first. Of course then they may well realize that there are other great database options available. Most problems in any domain are rooted in a failure to communicate. Cheers!
-
This is not sarcasm, for once. I am doing a bunch of contacts. The ability to parse web page source text in an Access memo box, add the appropriate items to the DB, and keep track of the contact information in the DB (and, even though I haven't gotten there yet, being able in Outlook to open up Access and add the send and reply dates back into the DB from there (should be doable, but haven't tackled it yet)), is a MASSIVE help. Everyone seems to shit on Office and VBA, but when used correctly it is TREMENDOUSLY POWERFUL! A small business could be ran with it pretty easily if you coded it up nicely, and I haven't came across anything in VBA that forces you not to code it nicely. People complain about the cost of Office, but with Access, the power is amazing when you are aware of it. I still want to complain about the cost, but there is no way in hell I could single-handedly code a suite like that in less than twenty years; probably many many more! It is cheap for what you can get out of it. So thank you! (But don't take this as an excuse to raise prices - you've distributed the cost among enough of us - quit being greedy; profits don't have to increase each year. Just making a profit when so many people are struggling to live should be good enough.) But quit worrying about stupid icons so much, and eliminate that totally utterly stupid idea of forcing an MS account just to install Windows. Your corporate head honchos are bending over backwards to make a dystopian future where everyone is looked at as a number with a revenue stream associated with it. Quit it! Focus on improving the user experience! Like some of the flakiness of Word when pictures are moved around! And combining the Control Panel and the new Settings program! Based on how well you did with VBA and Office overall, and my praise thereof, YOU CAN DO IT!!! Best wishes for a continuously improving future!!! And Thanks Again!
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
For over 20 years, my company has offered a choice on database options, Access or SQL Server for most of our desktop apps. For either smaller (< 20 sites) or single-user customers, Access makes perfect sense. While there are some slight differences in syntax, 99% of the same sql queries will work in either one. A nice thing about this (and something we do all the time) is that while I'm on a remote/support call I can downsize a customer's sql database, upload it, download it on my end, hook it up and troubleshoot right away. I also use Access for personal projects where portability is required...databases reside on an external drive.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse "Hope is contagious"
-
I've been poking around YouTube, trying to find whether SQL has Access's query design interface/tool/whatever. Designing queries in Access seems MUCH easier than SQL's offering, but maybe I'm not using the right search terms.
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
David O'Neil wrote:
Designing queries in Access seems MUCH easier than SQL's offering
:thumbsup: It irritates me every time I use the query designer in SSMS...take the time to arrange tables/objects in the designer, run the query, return to the designer and find that everything is back to being stacked vertical...it can't even remember the last window size ffs! :laugh: At least the Access designer remembers the layout. Additionally, because I need the same queries to work in both Access and SQL Server, I need to design in Access as table/view joins designed in Access will always work in SQL Server, but not the other way around. Oh yeah, and I also prefer Access < 2007. (.mdb) I've ranted about this before, but you'd think that the SSMS team would put a little more effort into the query designer. Every update nag I get, I wonder 'have they fixed it?' and every update I'm dissappointed! :sigh:
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse "Hope is contagious"
-
I'm not disputing the power of Access, VBA et al. For a given task or at least limited domain with a good plan it's powerful. The example you cited is the kind of thing it is most valuable for. The problem I've encountered a number of times is really a chain of issues that happens predictably, and Access gets the most heat from this situation. This is when powerful tools are readily available to users who happen to lack the training of a good database design, or application experience. In all cases these were smart people, who were in a hurry and didn't recognize the complexity of the tasks they were undertaking. The resulting issues blend and this pattern emerges in business and technical applications alike: > User with a need creates an application on [insert toolset here] etc on the desktop > The application fills the need nicely at first > Sometimes other users with similar needs recognize the power of the solution and start to use it too > All happens quietly without review or consideration from experienced IT staff or at least a knowledgeable Database expert. > Everyone is happy for a while (months, years...) because it just works. > Later we learn that the application is said to have run "really fast" when it was new. > Over time users forgot that the application was created entirely by "Dave in Engineering" or "Lucy in Underwriting" > Crisis happens - person/designer leaves | space runs out | computer fails > No one knew that person/designer had to [Insert task here] (e.g. "clean out the tables every couple of months to keep it running", "add new configurations") > No documentation, no source control, no backups > "Hey Fix This!" and our response is "What IS this? How long have you been using this?" I'm not exhagerating, and this pattern is my only real beef with Access. The price is secondary, but I'd say that if any company is willing to pay the cost of an Access license they should also put money into basic database design training first. Of course then they may well realize that there are other great database options available. Most problems in any domain are rooted in a failure to communicate. Cheers!
This is exactly what I see happening to many of the no-code/low-code solutions being touted these days.
-
You're probably better off using the free SQL Server express than Access. Also, Power BI is like Excel but with better and easier visualizations. With that said, MSN.com is really bad about censoring certain views on particular topics.
Can you interact with Word, Excel, and Outlook as easily with Express? And, as I've asked elsewhere, can you create queries in Express as easily as you can with Access? The query YouTube vids I've seen indicate that SQL Express complex queries are at least an order of magnitude more difficult to design than they are in Access. And, as kmoorevs indicated, it doesn't keep the view the way you had it when you reopen the designer. Access looks like a work of art compared to that.
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
-
This smells like "don't allow access to grow, it will eat into SqlServer" restrictions. So, max size is limited to a 32 bit value and # of objects is a word. Hmmm. I don't do databases any more but what is an object in these terms? :)
Charlie Gilley “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759 Has never been more appropriate.
-
This is not sarcasm, for once. I am doing a bunch of contacts. The ability to parse web page source text in an Access memo box, add the appropriate items to the DB, and keep track of the contact information in the DB (and, even though I haven't gotten there yet, being able in Outlook to open up Access and add the send and reply dates back into the DB from there (should be doable, but haven't tackled it yet)), is a MASSIVE help. Everyone seems to shit on Office and VBA, but when used correctly it is TREMENDOUSLY POWERFUL! A small business could be ran with it pretty easily if you coded it up nicely, and I haven't came across anything in VBA that forces you not to code it nicely. People complain about the cost of Office, but with Access, the power is amazing when you are aware of it. I still want to complain about the cost, but there is no way in hell I could single-handedly code a suite like that in less than twenty years; probably many many more! It is cheap for what you can get out of it. So thank you! (But don't take this as an excuse to raise prices - you've distributed the cost among enough of us - quit being greedy; profits don't have to increase each year. Just making a profit when so many people are struggling to live should be good enough.) But quit worrying about stupid icons so much, and eliminate that totally utterly stupid idea of forcing an MS account just to install Windows. Your corporate head honchos are bending over backwards to make a dystopian future where everyone is looked at as a number with a revenue stream associated with it. Quit it! Focus on improving the user experience! Like some of the flakiness of Word when pictures are moved around! And combining the Control Panel and the new Settings program! Based on how well you did with VBA and Office overall, and my praise thereof, YOU CAN DO IT!!! Best wishes for a continuously improving future!!! And Thanks Again!
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
I still use Office 2010 and Visual Studio with the Office developer stuff installed. Sometimes being able to build what is essentially a windows forms app, but uses a word doc for it's interface instead of a clunky win32 standard frame is great. Never needed to upgrade, bought a permanent copy and I intend to keep using it as long as my OS allows it, and since I'm on W10, have no desire to jump to the W11 gravy train even once it runs out of support, and since it all still works perfectly.... I'm pretty much sorted... But yes, you can do some insanely clever office based stuff, but it's not new and full of hot sexiness.... so no one cares anymore :-)
-
From my experience, I can see absolutely no reason to have that many columns. I got to look at BPCS, that the company used, and it was an absolute nightmare of a design, that I replicated some of with well-designed relational tables. I doubt I ever used many more than ten columns per a table, because there was absolutely no reason to do so if you normalize the data. But maybe I'm missing something.
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
I used to think the same thing. I would never build a table with that many columns. But I have run into a few tables along the way that were very wide. NPPES, National Plan and Provider Enumeration System allows the downloading of the NPI database as a csv file. Once a month I download and import this file into SQL for internal application viewing access. The structure is 329 columns/fields by 7 million or so rows. That is a lot of columns!
-
I used to think the same thing. I would never build a table with that many columns. But I have run into a few tables along the way that were very wide. NPPES, National Plan and Provider Enumeration System allows the downloading of the NPI database as a csv file. Once a month I download and import this file into SQL for internal application viewing access. The structure is 329 columns/fields by 7 million or so rows. That is a lot of columns!
Named 'COL1', 'COL2', etc... probably. :laugh:
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
-
Named 'COL1', 'COL2', etc... probably. :laugh:
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
YUP! Here is an example. Starts at 1. There are several other numbered fields: Other Provider Identifier Issuer_50
-
YUP! Here is an example. Starts at 1. There are several other numbered fields: Other Provider Identifier Issuer_50
:laugh:. I mean :doh:
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++
-
Objects in Access include: table; query; form; report. There are more, essentially everything inside.
well, okay, I understand. But having lived in a company that had really smart people and killed off by marketing, it still smells to me like a marketing issue.... with the # of updates of products, Microsoft should have no issue of updating access instead of rounding corners for notepad. yes, I'm tossing the total bullshit flag
Charlie Gilley “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759 Has never been more appropriate.
-
David O'Neil wrote:
Designing queries in Access seems MUCH easier than SQL's offering
:thumbsup: It irritates me every time I use the query designer in SSMS...take the time to arrange tables/objects in the designer, run the query, return to the designer and find that everything is back to being stacked vertical...it can't even remember the last window size ffs! :laugh: At least the Access designer remembers the layout. Additionally, because I need the same queries to work in both Access and SQL Server, I need to design in Access as table/view joins designed in Access will always work in SQL Server, but not the other way around. Oh yeah, and I also prefer Access < 2007. (.mdb) I've ranted about this before, but you'd think that the SSMS team would put a little more effort into the query designer. Every update nag I get, I wonder 'have they fixed it?' and every update I'm dissappointed! :sigh:
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse "Hope is contagious"
