A good reason to use ADP's

[Jerry Boone]

A long time ago Larry Linson (MVP contributor to this group) made a point to
me that mdb's could do anything ADP's (Access Projects) could by using
linked tables to leverage Sql server databases. It's been years since then,
and I still sometimes think about that statement when evaluating the
usefulness of the ADP's I build. Larry and I discussed this technique and
he found it "Credible" (hope you don't mind me quoting you sir) so what the
hell... here it goes - this is for all you die-hard ADP guys (and gals of
course). I know there have been long, drawn out debates over the very
subject at hand, some I have read and been a participant... and perhaps this
recommendation of usage has even came to surface - however, I felt it had
not been mentioned before by the way Larry responded.

After working with ADP's since the birth of A2K, I have found many
advantages that suit me... but what about you? Please understand, this
thread is not an open invitation to bash ADP's (let's try something new),
but rather a constructive way to figure out what tricks people are using
that make them "valuable" - ok? So, without further delay... here is one
innovative trick out of my bag in which I have kept for myself for some
time... yours for free if it's new to you...

Note that ADP's connect to Sql Server using an OLEDB connection. This type
of connection can and will definitely span further than the local network,
in fact it can span to any IP Address that has port 1433 (Sql Server) open
and Sql Server/MSDE running. Perhaps the strongest advantage ADP's have in
my business is that I can deploy them to multiple locations while hosting
the database. For a monthly fee, customers get a managed database and do
not incur the expense of a server. This model simply fits the small branch
office scenario "like a glove". Then, using bound forms and intelligent
Stored Procedure design, I have a very tight, fast performing (by keeping
records down), rich, and believe it or not... a secure delivered ADE
application.

How many people have a website that uses a Sql Server database? If so, did
you know you can more than likely connect to it with Access as a Project and
do whatever you want with the database... as long as you have the
credentials? Most, if not all ISP's who host Sql Databases allow you to
connect with Enterprise Manager - you can use those same credentials to
connect your copy of Access. Work with Data, build new queries, build some
forms for maintaining data, deploy them as an alternative to building
complex, yet featureless web page based maintenance systems.

I believe this is new with AccessXP, but did you know that you can now link
many flavors of tables to ADP's? Yes, Paradox, dBase, MDB's, and any ODBC
or OLEDB accessible engine... to name a few. Look into it if you have a
need for this. You could always link some of these from Sql Server, but now
it's a right click and link option in table view.

Anyway - I hope this thread stays positive and uncovers some really good
features that ADP's provide to working developers.

Professional replies are appreciated.

--
Jerry Boone
Analytical Technologies, Inc.
http://www.antech.biz
Secure Hosting and Development Solutions for ASP, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and
Access

[David W. Fenton]

je***@antech.bi z.killspam (Jerry Boone) wrote in
<UF************ *****@newssvr23 .news.prodigy.c om>:

You can also go back and read about how I go a step further than
the "norm" and allow only reputable customers with static ip's
access to 1433 at the firewall, then additionally shift the port
on the even yet more secure sql service for my elite group.

Using a VPN would eliminate all sorts of risks as well as
eliminating the restriction to a list of IP addresses (fixed or
not).

That's all I have to say.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Jerry Boone]

Another... but more subtle reason...

Using ADP's forces you to become a stronger ADO and Sql Server developer
which leads you to other great tools. Since these two items are key players
to the entire fleet of MS developer products, it gives you power to know how
to use them well.

Now, understand that I am not saying that you "can't learn" if you use
mdb's, but that adp's push you harder to produce server side code and wean
you off of the expression builders and other tools that are not in ADP's and
other dev environments.

The things we all do with Mdb's are great... no doubt that useable databases
can literally be built in minutes. Complex tasks are easy with expressions
& vba, not to mention that the subtle performance loss from linked tables
over odbc vs. native oledb is generally acceptable when the database is
small and the concurrent user count is low.

What happens when it's time to build data driven web pages, deploy a dll in
VB or flavor of C, produce a small utility (pure coded exe, not access or db
related) application for Active Directory containers or to do WMI calls on a
domain server...? Hmm... no easy cheater tools for that. What a terrible
place for a confident and accomplished mdb developer to land in!

I feel that using ADP's gently persuaded me to get serious about ADO, which
led to understanding com objects better, which led to getting deep into all
the features that are grossly under-discovered in Sql server like triggers,
udf's (new in 2k), dts, job agents, profiler, defaults, full text indexing,
auto tuning, multi proc, (geez... I could literally go on forever) which led
me into VB because I understood how to fetch data in recordsets and bind
them to vb forms, which led me to looping data on ASP pages, which gave me
the nuts to hammer at VB.Net and ASP.Net... the list just goes on and on.
I cannot say with certainty that had I not made a move to using ADP's that I
would not have been motivated to discover any of that stuff. You can
survive with querydefs, dao, odbc, and all of that until MS stops putting it
out and that's fine if that is all you want or need to do. I believe MS
killed DDE support in .Net this time around and in time even ADO will get
the ax, but not before odbc does.

Bottom line is that adp's can motivate you to learn these technologies in a
more subtle manner than for say... diving right into .Net (talk about mental
suicide) -- there are few ladders in the development world as subtle as
ADP's and climbing those once and a while can lead you to discover some new
and very valuable things. Just remember that motivation, opportunity, and
the tenacity to put up with the problems that come with new territory is not
always a bad thing. All great discoveries are truly realized when leaving
the protection of familiarity.
--
Jerry Boone
Analytical Technologies, Inc.
http://www.antech.biz
Secure Hosting and Development Solutions for ASP, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and
Access

"Jerry Boone" <je***@antech.b iz.killspam> wrote in message
news:f0******** ***********@new ssvr11.news.pro digy.com...

A long time ago Larry Linson (MVP contributor to this group) made a point to me that mdb's could do anything ADP's (Access Projects) could by using
linked tables to leverage Sql server databases. It's been years since then, and I still sometimes think about that statement when evaluating the
usefulness of the ADP's I build. Larry and I discussed this technique and
he found it "Credible" (hope you don't mind me quoting you sir) so what the hell... here it goes - this is for all you die-hard ADP guys (and gals of
course). I know there have been long, drawn out debates over the very
subject at hand, some I have read and been a participant... and perhaps this recommendation of usage has even came to surface - however, I felt it had
not been mentioned before by the way Larry responded.

After working with ADP's since the birth of A2K, I have found many
advantages that suit me... but what about you? Please understand, this
thread is not an open invitation to bash ADP's (let's try something new),
but rather a constructive way to figure out what tricks people are using
that make them "valuable" - ok? So, without further delay... here is one
innovative trick out of my bag in which I have kept for myself for some
time... yours for free if it's new to you...

Note that ADP's connect to Sql Server using an OLEDB connection. This type of connection can and will definitely span further than the local network,
in fact it can span to any IP Address that has port 1433 (Sql Server) open
and Sql Server/MSDE running. Perhaps the strongest advantage ADP's have in my business is that I can deploy them to multiple locations while hosting
the database. For a monthly fee, customers get a managed database and do
not incur the expense of a server. This model simply fits the small branch office scenario "like a glove". Then, using bound forms and intelligent
Stored Procedure design, I have a very tight, fast performing (by keeping
records down), rich, and believe it or not... a secure delivered ADE
application.

How many people have a website that uses a Sql Server database? If so, did you know you can more than likely connect to it with Access as a Project and do whatever you want with the database... as long as you have the
credentials? Most, if not all ISP's who host Sql Databases allow you to
connect with Enterprise Manager - you can use those same credentials to
connect your copy of Access. Work with Data, build new queries, build some forms for maintaining data, deploy them as an alternative to building
complex, yet featureless web page based maintenance systems.

I believe this is new with AccessXP, but did you know that you can now link many flavors of tables to ADP's? Yes, Paradox, dBase, MDB's, and any ODBC
or OLEDB accessible engine... to name a few. Look into it if you have a
need for this. You could always link some of these from Sql Server, but now it's a right click and link option in table view.

Anyway - I hope this thread stays positive and uncovers some really good
features that ADP's provide to working developers.

Professional replies are appreciated.

--
Jerry Boone
Analytical Technologies, Inc.
http://www.antech.biz
Secure Hosting and Development Solutions for ASP, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and
Access

[Jerry Boone]

Right - I agree with that to a certain degree. I think VPN's are great for
employees or members of the immediate trusted realm. But the reality is
that all companies hire people who change settings. Things that were one
way yesterday are different today. It is harder to constantly secure an
entire network (in which trusted employees work with) than controlling one
port and what entity accesses it, and even "when" they are able to access
it.

A user with VPN access has an entire network of vulnerabilities to explore
and generally with no firewall to contend with. Everything from the
underdog Win95 computer in the plant to the domain controllers. I
understand that provisions can be made but after a while it gets kind of
mundane. I have several VPN's and they are all very well used, but only by
trusted individuals in the immediate realm in which I would extend a port on
the switch within a building -- sorry, no average Joe's allowed.

Web apps on 80 for John and Jane, 1433 for friends, VPN for family.

--
Jerry Boone
Analytical Technologies, Inc.
http://www.antech.biz
Secure Hosting and Development Solutions for ASP, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and
Access
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .90...

je***@antech.bi z.killspam (Jerry Boone) wrote in
<UF************ *****@newssvr23 .news.prodigy.c om>:

You can also go back and read about how I go a step further than
the "norm" and allow only reputable customers with static ip's
access to 1433 at the firewall, then additionally shift the port
on the even yet more secure sql service for my elite group.

Using a VPN would eliminate all sorts of risks as well as
eliminating the restriction to a list of IP addresses (fixed or
not).

That's all I have to say.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[David W. Fenton]

je***@antech.bi z.killspam (Jerry Boone) wrote in
<%8************ *****@newssvr22 .news.prodigy.c om>:

A user with VPN access has an entire network of vulnerabilities to
explore and generally with no firewall to contend with.

If the administrator knows how to configure the VPN *and* how to
properly manage NT users and user groups and apply appropriate ACLs
to network resources, your statement is false.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Jerry Boone]

ACL's are good, I haven't used them because I don't need to and out of 30+
networks I can't think of one that has ever required it. Especially mine...

Giving out VPN access is not something ISP's normally do, and if you find a
few - good for you, they have more time on their hands than I do and maybe
even share your 1433 paranoia. My customers are happy that they have one
step to opening an app and I'm happy that I never have vpn connection
issues. I doubt there is anything that can change my mind on that.

--
Jerry Boone
Analytical Technologies, Inc.
http://www.antech.biz
Secure Hosting and Development Solutions for ASP, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and
Access

[Albert D. Kallal]

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message

news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .74...

pl************* *****@msn.com (Albert D. Kallal) wrote in
<t7vKb.9472$hk. 20@pd7tw1no>:
Well, what if you have a client with an Access/Jet application who
has neither SQL Server nor WTS set up. Which is cheaper and easier
to setup and which is cheaper and easier to administer? Which
requires more work to maintain? I'm pretty sure that WTS wins out
here and quite handily.
Yes, I fully agree with the above. So, yes, WTS would without
question by my choice. If one has sql server already
for the application, then we most certainly have a much more
lively debate here (but that is not our debate!).
But you were suggesting that Access/Jet over WTS is more
difficult and more expensive than converting the app to SQL Server
and deploying that way. I strenuously disagree.

I am well in agreement with the above also. However, I will say that
converting a relative simple ms-access application to work
with JET/ODBC to sql server can actually be FAR cheaper then using
WTS. So, in fact I am hinting that using JET/odbc, or even a adp
*might* be a cheaper choice then deploying WTS. The reasons here is
that WTS does have fairly steep licensing fees. So, for a simple
application with 20 remote users, sql server (either JET/odbc, or
adp) can actually be a lot cheaper). However, this savings would
only occur if NOT a lot of programming labour is required to
convert the application from a JET file share to a JET/odbc to
sql server.

So, yes, in most cases, WTS would be far better then spending
money converting the application to work with sql server, but
this would not always be the case. Also WTS takes a lot more
horse power and ram to run then does sql server for a given
number of users. So, there is "some" factors at play here,
and as always, no cut and dry 100% rule for every case.
--
Albert D. Kallal (MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
No************@ msn.com
http://www.attcanada.net/~kallal.msn

[David W. Fenton]

je***@antech.bi z.killspam (Jerry Boone) wrote in
<fa************ *****@newssvr24 .news.prodigy.c om>:

ACL's are good, I haven't used them because I don't need to and
out of 30+ networks I can't think of one that has ever required
it. Especially mine...

Giving out VPN access is not something ISP's normally do, and if
you find a few - good for you, they have more time on their hands
than I do and maybe even share your 1433 paranoia. My customers
are happy that they have one step to opening an app and I'm happy
that I never have vpn connection issues. I doubt there is
anything that can change my mind on that.

I did not know an ISP was involved.

If I were your clients, I wouldn't be too happy with that
situation.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[David W. Fenton]

pl************* *****@msn.com (Albert D. Kallal) wrote in
<Qr0Lb.17519$JQ 1.1716@pd7tw1no >:

So, in fact I am hinting that using JET/odbc, or even a adp
*might* be a cheaper choice then deploying WTS. The reasons here
is that WTS does have fairly steep licensing fees.

And the comparison to the licensing fees for SQL Server?

You seem to be assuming that those have already been paid for and
the WTS licenses not. In a situation where SQL Server is already in
use and licensed, yes, that obviously changes the equation.

But that simply is not the scenario that was under discussion in
this threadlet.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Jerry Boone]

Well, your not - and that's ok with me, unless of course you have a better
idea than the thousands of other ISP's that won't even go as far as I do.

--
Jerry Boone
Analytical Technologies, Inc.
http://www.antech.biz
Secure Hosting and Development Solutions for ASP, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and
Access
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .86...

je***@antech.bi z.killspam (Jerry Boone) wrote in
<fa************ *****@newssvr24 .news.prodigy.c om>:

ACL's are good, I haven't used them because I don't need to and
out of 30+ networks I can't think of one that has ever required
it. Especially mine...

Giving out VPN access is not something ISP's normally do, and if
you find a few - good for you, they have more time on their hands
than I do and maybe even share your 1433 paranoia. My customers
are happy that they have one step to opening an app and I'm happy
that I never have vpn connection issues. I doubt there is
anything that can change my mind on that.

I did not know an ISP was involved.

If I were your clients, I wouldn't be too happy with that
situation.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Jerry Boone]

They have the licenses if they are running SBS. However, somewhere in
SBS... MS decided you still have to pay for WTS licenses on top of that.

--
Jerry Boone
Analytical Technologies, Inc.
http://www.antech.biz
Secure Hosting and Development Solutions for ASP, ASP.NET, SQL Server, and
Access
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .86...

pl************* *****@msn.com (Albert D. Kallal) wrote in
<Qr0Lb.17519$JQ 1.1716@pd7tw1no >:

So, in fact I am hinting that using JET/odbc, or even a adp
*might* be a cheaper choice then deploying WTS. The reasons here
is that WTS does have fairly steep licensing fees.

And the comparison to the licensing fees for SQL Server?

You seem to be assuming that those have already been paid for and
the WTS licenses not. In a situation where SQL Server is already in
use and licensed, yes, that obviously changes the equation.

But that simply is not the scenario that was under discussion in
this threadlet.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc