By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
435,397 Members | 2,515 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 435,397 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Future of MS ACCESS ...

P: n/a
Hi to all!

A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
this. Does anybody know more about it?
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?

Thanks in advance!

Uwe
Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
33 Replies


P: n/a
Uwe Range wrote:
Hi to all!

A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
this. Does anybody know more about it?
I see Chicken Little made IT Manager then.
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end?
Yes.
Does this work well?


I'll let someone who's done it answer that :-)

--
This sig left intentionally blank
Nov 13 '05 #2

P: n/a
ur****@gmx.de (Uwe Range) wrote:
A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
this. Does anybody know more about it?
Absolute rubbish. There are a lot more folks at Microsoft working on the next
version of Access than there have been for the last several versions.
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?


There have been comments in the newsgroup from folks who have worked with Access and
Oracle a fair bit. I don't recall any specific negative comments so at least they
work together. Dunno how well though.

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
Nov 13 '05 #3

P: n/a
On 17 Feb 2005 08:11:02 -0800, Uwe Range <ur****@gmx.de> wrote:
A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
this. Does anybody know more about it?
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?


I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and recent
developments is that Access will continue in the next version of Office,
however, VBA as we know it will be dead, replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?),
DAO will be gone, replaced by ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new
SQL Server 2005 Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together in
time for a late 2005 release.

Like the .Net Framework, SQL Server Personal Edition will be standard on
every XP install after 2005, and more and more the .Net Framework and SQL
Server will be interwoven with Windows. Your upgrade path to SQL Server
will not entail redesigning your Access app, just spending more money on
the back end. You will be foolish to ever switch, then, to any other
database other than MS SQL Server, any other web server but IIS, any other
OS but Windows XP Server, or any other game device but X-Box.

Unless it catches fire.

Darryl Kerkeslager
Nov 13 '05 #4

P: n/a
Darryl Kerkeslager wrote:
On 17 Feb 2005 08:11:02 -0800, Uwe Range <ur****@gmx.de> wrote:
A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
this. Does anybody know more about it?
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?

I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and
recent developments is that Access will continue in the next version of
Office, however, VBA as we know it will be dead, replaced by VB.Net
(VBA.Net?), DAO will be gone, replaced by ADO.Net, and Jet will be
replaced by the new SQL Server 2005 Personal Edition, if MS can get it
all playing together in time for a late 2005 release.

Like the .Net Framework, SQL Server Personal Edition will be standard
on every XP install after 2005, and more and more the .Net Framework
and SQL Server will be interwoven with Windows. Your upgrade path to
SQL Server will not entail redesigning your Access app, just spending
more money on the back end. You will be foolish to ever switch, then,
to any other database other than MS SQL Server, any other web server
but IIS, any other OS but Windows XP Server, or any other game device
but X-Box.

Unless it catches fire.

Darryl Kerkeslager

Sure be great if Microsoft would add an integrated web server into
Access as Filemaker Pro and another competitor have done. They make it
EASY to use their database to provide web-enabled apps. Access' DAP
capabilities is quite limited. And using Frontpage or Web Matrix or
Visual Studio.NET requires you to get to the code level to do anything
interesting. All have some wizards but it seems I always have to get
into code to do things I could do with Access without code.

Bob
Nov 13 '05 #5

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...
On 17 Feb 2005 08:11:02 -0800, Uwe Range <ur****@gmx.de> wrote:
A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
this. Does anybody know more about it?
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?


I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and recent
developments is that Access will continue in the next version of Office,
however, VBA as we know it will be dead, replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?),
DAO will be gone, replaced by ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new
SQL Server 2005 Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together in
time for a late 2005 release.

Like the .Net Framework, SQL Server Personal Edition will be standard on
every XP install after 2005, and more and more the .Net Framework and SQL
Server will be interwoven with Windows. Your upgrade path to SQL Server
will not entail redesigning your Access app, just spending more money on
the back end. You will be foolish to ever switch, then, to any other
database other than MS SQL Server, any other web server but IIS, any other
OS but Windows XP Server, or any other game device but X-Box.


Without saying anything more, I'd be willing to bet otherwise. How much are
you willing to lose?
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
Microsoft Access
Free Access downloads:
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access
Nov 13 '05 #6

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:
I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and
recent developments is that Access will continue in the next
version of Office, however, VBA as we know it will be dead,
replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?), DAO will be gone, replaced by
ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new SQL Server 2005
Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together in time
for a late 2005 release.


Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.

That would mean forcing everyone to ADPs, and that just ain't gonna
happen.

I predict (based on nothing):

1. next version of Access will still have VBA, no VBA.NET, and Jet
will still be the default data engine.

2. the version after that will implement VBA.NET as the default, but
will still run and allow the creation of regular VBA. Jet will
remain the default db engine.

3. the version after that will make MSDE the default db engine, but
will continue to support Jet natively, and will continue to do so
forever. That means DAO will live as long as Jet is in Access.

Removing Jet from Access would mean Access no longer existed.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #7

P: n/a
Hey Arvin

Which part(s) of these predictions are you wanting to 'bet against'?
"Arvin Meyer" <a@m.com> wrote in message
news:Nr*****************@newsread3.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...
On 17 Feb 2005 08:11:02 -0800, Uwe Range <ur****@gmx.de> wrote:
A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
this. Does anybody know more about it?
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?
I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and recent developments is that Access will continue in the next version of Office,
however, VBA as we know it will be dead, replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?),
DAO will be gone, replaced by ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new SQL Server 2005 Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together in time for a late 2005 release.

Like the .Net Framework, SQL Server Personal Edition will be standard on
every XP install after 2005, and more and more the .Net Framework and SQL Server will be interwoven with Windows. Your upgrade path to SQL Server
will not entail redesigning your Access app, just spending more money on
the back end. You will be foolish to ever switch, then, to any other
database other than MS SQL Server, any other web server but IIS, any other OS but Windows XP Server, or any other game device but X-Box.


Without saying anything more, I'd be willing to bet otherwise. How much

are you willing to lose?
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
Microsoft Access
Free Access downloads:
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access

Nov 13 '05 #8

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...
I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and recent
developments is that Access will continue in the next version of Office,
however, VBA as we know it will be dead
Boy, that is a tall order. I don't see VBA going away anytime soon.
Remember, there is probably BILLIONS of spreadsheets out there, and note
that
ANY macro in Excel is actually VBA. MS have NEVER had a history of cutting
off its legs.

Unless a seamless converter is developed, then it is nearly impossible to
throw out VBA, and this much due to Excel. And, point to be, Word also has
the same problem.

If you recall history, on at least 2, or 3 occasions Apple computer forced
the em-mass throwing out of all software. Each time apple did this,
customers ingratiated out of apple, and into the hands of MS. It quite
important to note that as a strategy, much of MS's success is due to have
the BEST TRACK RECORD in the industry in terms of compatibility. While
virtually
ALL OF your Apple software had to be thrown out (and does not run on a new
mac), MS has taken the road in which they MAKE VERY BIG efforts to keep
compatibility. So, today, I can (and actually have) clients running FoxPro
code that I wrote in 1987, and it runs on a BRAND NEW pc. Further, right
now, you can run, and install a 10 year old version of ms-access on a BRAND
new. pc.

In fact, you can go all the way back, and run the ORIGINAL version of
Visi-Calc (that is the first spreadsheet for the pc). That year is 1981. So,
as a policy, and strategy, Microsoft BENDS OVER BACKWARDS to keep your
software environment running.

Right now, NOTHING is stopping you from finding a old version of VB5, and
continuing to develop using that software.

So, while other desktop vendors have had a policy of forcing you to
throw out your old software, much of MS's strategy has been to preserve,
and allow your old software to run.

With the advent of products like open source "office" etc, it would be the
HEIGHT OF STUPIDLY if MS were force you to throw out all your Excel and word
macros (which there are gazioonls of them..and they rely on VBA).

Without question, the new office 2003 has support for .net code for both
Excel, and Word, but he VBA compatibility, and ability remain 100% intact.

The fact is, one big secret at Microsoft has been to keep compatible while
competitors force you to throw out software.

The idea that MS is going to throw out VBA in the near future would really
laughably. They certainly will add .net type abilities, but VBA cannot be
thrown out, else they risk millions of users dumping the product altogether.
MS did not so big and success by accident. One of the real secret weapons
has been to protect your software investment..and that is why the brand new
windows XP still supports 20 year old software.

I can't imagine anyone with a sane view of business willing to throw out
VBA.
In fact, I bet we will not see it disappear in our lifetimes..and if it
does..we will have to be given some tools that make the conversion seamless.
DAO will be gone, replaced by ADO.Net


No, history does not show that. In 1998 the big new thing was ADO, and
developers were supposed to dump DAO.

Well, guess what, ms-access users complained. After two full versions of
office, now office 2003 and access2003 has the DAO library RETUNED BY
DEFAULT. In other words, they listened to the developer community, and
brought back the DAO reference in a2003 by default. This again just proves
that MS does, and MUST listen to the marketplace. So, it may be well that
developers are dumping ADO and moving to ado.net..but the fact remains that
MS worked hard in a2003 to make it very compatible, and as their general
policy, you can see again the fact that they RETURNED the DAO reference by
default in this new version of office shows how much they value
compatibility.

Unless I am missing somthing here..the track record points to long term
thinking in this regards...

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
pl*****************@msn.com
http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal
Nov 13 '05 #9

P: n/a
All of them. Or any of them. I'd give odds, but that would sucker some poor
fool in and I'd be taking unfair advantage.
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
Microsoft Access
Free Access downloads:
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access

"Andrew Chanter" <he****@radsolutions.com.au> wrote in message
news:Cv********************@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Hey Arvin

Which part(s) of these predictions are you wanting to 'bet against'?
"Arvin Meyer" <a@m.com> wrote in message
news:Nr*****************@newsread3.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...
On 17 Feb 2005 08:11:02 -0800, Uwe Range <ur****@gmx.de> wrote:

> A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
> ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project, > because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of > this. Does anybody know more about it?
> The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this > direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
> front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?

I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and recent developments is that Access will continue in the next version of Office, however, VBA as we know it will be dead, replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?), DAO will be gone, replaced by ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new SQL Server 2005 Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together
in
time for a late 2005 release.

Like the .Net Framework, SQL Server Personal Edition will be standard
on every XP install after 2005, and more and more the .Net Framework and

SQL Server will be interwoven with Windows. Your upgrade path to SQL Server will not entail redesigning your Access app, just spending more money on the back end. You will be foolish to ever switch, then, to any other
database other than MS SQL Server, any other web server but IIS, any other OS but Windows XP Server, or any other game device but X-Box.


Without saying anything more, I'd be willing to bet otherwise. How much

are
you willing to lose?
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
Microsoft Access
Free Access downloads:
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access


Nov 13 '05 #10

P: n/a
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:49:57 -0500, "Darryl Kerkeslager"
<ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:

<snip>

Like the .Net Framework, SQL Server Personal Edition will be standard on
every XP install after 2005, and more and more the .Net Framework and SQL
Server will be interwoven with Windows.
I think I will become a lawyer then.
... You will be foolish to ever switch, then, to any other
database other than MS SQL Server, any other web server but IIS, any other
OS but Windows XP Server, or any other game device but X-Box.


Ouch!

David
Nov 13 '05 #11

P: n/a
On 17 Feb 2005 08:11:02 -0800, ur****@gmx.de (Uwe Range) wrote:

<snip>
The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?
It worked well for me a few years ago, as does db2 now. You can use
the Access front end with anything really. The main question would be
what front end to use rather than what back end, normally you use
whatever back end the customer uses.
Thanks in advance!

Uwe


Nov 13 '05 #12

P: n/a
ur****@gmx.de (Uwe Range) wrote:

A few articles and quotes.

http://msaccessadvisor.com/doc/14978

"Microsoft vice president Richard McAniff said Microsoft Access now has the largest
development team since the product's original creation. "

"the development team at Microsoft tells us its highest priority for Access 12 is
improved usability. Microsoft wants to make it easier than ever to create Access
applications. Microsoft Access lead program manager Clint Covington says, "You'll
find a strategic commitment to radically upgrade the quality of Access applications
by improving the core forms and reports experience, using Jet as the query
processor."

http://msaccessadvisor.com/doc/14850

Microsoft Access is only getting better

"One concern that Richard addressed head-on was the widespread uncertainty over
whether Microsoft still values Access. He told us that it definitely does (and Jet
too!) and is backing that up with a big budget for development on the next version.
In fact, I learned that one reason we couldn't see more at the conference was that
there are several patents are pending on new technology being added to Access!
Enhancements to SharePoint integration with Access will only strengthen the
importance of Access as a strategic Microsoft product, and that will help all Access
developers."

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
Nov 13 '05 #13

P: n/a
"Albert D. Kallal" <ka****@msn.com> wrote in
news:npeRd.416920$Xk.165375@pd7tw3no:
In fact, you can go all the way back, and run the ORIGINAL version
of Visi-Calc (that is the first spreadsheet for the pc). That year
is 1981. So, as a policy, and strategy, Microsoft BENDS OVER
BACKWARDS to keep your software environment running.


I have a client running a small dBase II application compiled in
1983. He has been able to run it on all of the PCs he's ever had,
including his current XP box. It has occasionally required a little
tiny bit of tweaking, but it still works.

I agree that this is a pretty remarkable thing, and something MS
gets insufficient credit for.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #14

P: n/a
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 02:31:09 GMT, Arvin Meyer <a@m.com> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...
On 17 Feb 2005 08:11:02 -0800, Uwe Range <ur****@gmx.de> wrote:
> A customer of mine told me some days ago that her IT-people told her
> ACCESS would not be such a good idea for continuing with our project,
> because Access will not be continued in the future. I haven't heard of
> this. Does anybody know more about it?
> The IT-People usually prefer Oracle. If they really want to go in this
> direction, could our Access-application (if continued) be used as a
> front end with an Oracle back end? Does this work well?


I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and
recent
developments is that Access will continue in the next version of Office,
however, VBA as we know it will be dead, replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?),
DAO will be gone, replaced by ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the
new
SQL Server 2005 Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together
in
time for a late 2005 release.

Like the .Net Framework, SQL Server Personal Edition will be standard on
every XP install after 2005, and more and more the .Net Framework and
SQL
Server will be interwoven with Windows. Your upgrade path to SQL Server
will not entail redesigning your Access app, just spending more money on
the back end. You will be foolish to ever switch, then, to any other
database other than MS SQL Server, any other web server but IIS, any
other
OS but Windows XP Server, or any other game device but X-Box.


Without saying anything more, I'd be willing to bet otherwise. How much
are
you willing to lose?


Not a dime :) Care to elaborate ... :)
Darryl Kerkeslager
Nov 13 '05 #15

P: n/a
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 02:38:32 GMT, David W. Fenton
<dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:
I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and
recent developments is that Access will continue in the next
version of Office, however, VBA as we know it will be dead,
replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?), DAO will be gone, replaced by
ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new SQL Server 2005
Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together in time
for a late 2005 release.
Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.


"Support" for Jet is already gone. See definition of "Deprecated".
That would mean forcing everyone to ADPs, and that just ain't gonna
happen.
Jumping to conclusion. MS has come up with many new technologies over the
years; just because DAO and Jet go does not mean that ADP is the only
alternative.

I predict (based on nothing):

2. the version after that will implement VBA.NET as the default, but
will still run and allow the creation of regular VBA. Jet will
remain the default db engine.
I say next version, you say version after. I say Access XP has taken MS
as far as they can go, and their is no good reason to continue to fine
tune software that is not a convincing upgrade. At some point, producers
must make meaningful changes, or margins begin to suffer (well, okay, MS
may not be worrying too much about margins, but the principle still holds).

3. the version after that will make MSDE the default db engine, but
will continue to support Jet natively, and will continue to do so
forever. That means DAO will live as long as Jet is in Access.
MSDE is a dead horse. SQL Server 2005 (personal Edition) will soon
replace it. Otherwise, there would have been no logical reason to develop
the personal (single CPU) edition.

Removing Jet from Access would mean Access no longer existed.


Access was still Access without macros, wasn't it? Access is still Access
without Jet. What makes Access "Access" is the GUI, without which very
few would have ever picked it up.

Darryl Kerkeslager






Nov 13 '05 #16

P: n/a
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 04:45:07 GMT, Albert D. Kallal <ka****@msn.com> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...
I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history and
recent
developments is that Access will continue in the next version of Office,
however, VBA as we know it will be dead
Boy, that is a tall order. I don't see VBA going away anytime soon.
Remember, there is probably BILLIONS of spreadsheets out there, and note
that
ANY macro in Excel is actually VBA. MS have NEVER had a history of
cutting
off its legs.

Unless a seamless converter is developed, then it is nearly impossible to
throw out VBA, and this much due to Excel. And, point to be, Word also
has
the same problem.


I believe MSIL is that seamless converter. If C# and VB.Net can be made
MSIL-compliant, than there is no reason to think that VBA cannot be as
well. The whole premise of the .Net initiative was that any language
could be modified to fit in to the Framework. There is no reason to
"throw out" all the code. MS. as you say, has done very well at allowing
prior versions to run in the existing framework, be it a new OS, or even a
substantial Office upgrade like going from 97 to 2000. I never said - and
would not say - that apps written in 97, 2000, 2002, etc would just stop
functioning. I agree, that would be a misttake, and not at all in the MS
tradition.

However, it is in the MS tradition to merge technologies, as both a cost
savings, and as a way to leverage market share in one area with market
share in another. I have no data to back this up, but logic tells me that
when the Windows 95/98 core was eliminated in XP, MS saved millions
(billions(?)) in development and support costs. While the savings willn
ot be as substantial by no longer supporting two database engines, or two
programming languages (using MSIL as one), the savings should still be
really, really big.
So,
as a policy, and strategy, Microsoft BENDS OVER BACKWARDS to keep your
software environment running.
Agreed. never said it wouldn't.
Without question, the new office 2003 has support for .net code for both
Excel, and Word, but he VBA compatibility, and ability remain 100%
intact.
Course. But, what I am talking about is native support. Word 2000 still
supports macros, but it is no longer the foundation of the product.

No, history does not show that. In 1998 the big new thing was ADO, and
developers were supposed to dump DAO.

Well, guess what, ms-access users complained. After two full versions of
office, now office 2003 and access2003 has the DAO library RETUNED BY
DEFAULT. In other words, they listened to the developer community, and
brought back the DAO reference in a2003 by default. This again just
proves
that MS does, and MUST listen to the marketplace. So, it may be well that
developers are dumping ADO and moving to ado.net..but the fact remains
that
MS worked hard in a2003 to make it very compatible, and as their general
policy, you can see again the fact that they RETURNED the DAO reference
by
default in this new version of office shows how much they value
compatibility.


ADO outside the .Net framework was a dead-end, as it turned out (not quite
as bad as RDO), but just because DAO has replaced ADO again, does not mean
that DAO will always be the default. MS has, after all, made some
mistakes, and shoved those efforts to the great beyond (Remember Bob? ME?
Callbacks? the DOS 5 GUI?).
Darryl Kerkeslager
Nov 13 '05 #17

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:
Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.


"Support" for Jet is already gone. See definition of "Deprecated".


The phrases I have seen were in relation to MDAC. Thus I'd read that as Jet is
deprecated from MDAC. But not from Access.

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
Nov 13 '05 #18

P: n/a
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 23:27:01 GMT, Tony Toews <tt****@telusplanet.net>
wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:
Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.


"Support" for Jet is already gone. See definition of "Deprecated".


The phrases I have seen were in relation to MDAC. Thus I'd read that as
Jet is
deprecated from MDAC. But not from Access.

Well, okay, that's true, but I'm missing the importance of the
distinction. If Jet is no longer part of future data access components
that are installed by default with the OS, then it is "on the way out".
It is no longer being developed - like ADO, and DAO. Or Windows 98. Or
NT.

If XP version 2005 (2006?) includes SQL Server with every installation,
what is the need for Jet? Really - why have it at all, if the OS already
has a database?

Darryl Kerkeslager
Nov 13 '05 #19

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 02:38:32 GMT, David W. Fenton
<dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:
I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history
and recent developments is that Access will continue in the
next version of Office, however, VBA as we know it will be
dead, replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?), DAO will be gone, replaced
by ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new SQL Server 2005
Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together in time
for a late 2005 release.
Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.


"Support" for Jet is already gone. See definition of
"Deprecated".


In this context, "support" meant "Access reads and writes Jet files"
not "Microsoft provides customer support for Jet."
That would mean forcing everyone to ADPs, and that just ain't
gonna happen.


Jumping to conclusion. MS has come up with many new technologies
over the years; just because DAO and Jet go does not mean that
ADP is the only alternative.


So, you're suggesting that MS would:

1. abandon Jet support in Access (and thus, ship an Access that
doesn't read or write MDB files)

2. instead of promoting the existing alternate file format, ADP
(which MS claims is Jetless, though I have my doubts on that), a
format that has been through several versions since it was
introduced in A2K, MS would create a brand-new file format that
didn't use Jet in order to, well, in order to *what*?

Your suggestion is complete nonsense.
I predict (based on nothing):

2. the version after that will implement VBA.NET as the default,
but will still run and allow the creation of regular VBA. Jet
will remain the default db engine.


I say next version, you say version after. . ..


But you said VBA would be *dropped* (well, you said "dead", which I
take to mean "definitively not in Access at all any longer) in the
next version. I did not posit any point at which VBA would be
entirely dropped from Access.

So, there's a huge difference between what you said and what I said,
not just a difference of one version.
. . . I say Access XP has
taken MS as far as they can go, and their is no good reason to
continue to fine tune software that is not a convincing upgrade.
At some point, producers must make meaningful changes, or margins
begin to suffer (well, okay, MS may not be worrying too much
about margins, but the principle still holds).
Word has not seen a meaningful change since Word97.

In any event, there are tons of things that could be improved in
Access, both for end users and for developers.
3. the version after that will make MSDE the default db engine,
but will continue to support Jet natively, and will continue to
do so forever. That means DAO will live as long as Jet is in
Access.


MSDE is a dead horse. SQL Server 2005 (personal Edition) . . .


Well, when I use the term "MSDE," I mean what MS insists on calling
"SQL Server xxxx Personal Edition." It's a shorter abbreviation, and
it means exactly the same thing.
. . . will
soon replace it. Otherwise, there would have been no logical
reason to develop the personal (single CPU) edition.


There's more to it than just the limitation to a single CPU.
Removing Jet from Access would mean Access no longer existed.


Access was still Access without macros, wasn't it? Access is
still Access without Jet. What makes Access "Access" is the GUI,
without which very few would have ever picked it up.


MS could slap the word "Access" on any product it chose. That
doesn't make it the product that they've been shipping. Jet is so
central to Access that Access without it would not really be the
same tool. MSDE is simply *not* a replacement for Jet, as it's more
complex to install and administer and takes up far, far more
resources.

And the differences between ADPs and MDBs are stark -- ADPs are far
from offering the same functionality and ease of use as MDBs.

I can't think of any software product ever that complete abandons
support for its original file format, the file format in which much
of the application is itself written (you do realize that all the
wizards in Access are shipped as MDE files, right?).

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #20

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 23:27:01 GMT, Tony Toews
<tt****@telusplanet.net> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:
Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.

"Support" for Jet is already gone. See definition of
"Deprecated".
The phrases I have seen were in relation to MDAC. Thus I'd read
that as Jet is
deprecated from MDAC. But not from Access.

Well, okay, that's true, but I'm missing the importance of the
distinction. If Jet is no longer part of future data access
components that are installed by default with the OS, then it is
"on the way out". . . .


In 1996, Jet was not installed as part of the OS, and most of the
future of Jet was still ahead of it.
. . . It is no longer being developed - like ADO,
and DAO. Or Windows 98. Or NT.
But MS still uses Jet in lots of products, including Access, and
will continue to do so for a long time.
If XP version 2005 (2006?) includes SQL Server with every
installation, what is the need for Jet? Really - why have it at
all, if the OS already has a database?


Longhorn isn't going to include SQL Server -- WinFS may not even
ship with the original version of Longhorn.

Secondly, if you ship Access without a db engine, then what do the
people who aren't running Longhorn do?

Based on the consistently idiotic things you post in the newsgroup,
I'm beginning to suspect that you are actually Don Mellon in one of
his many disguises.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #21

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...
Without saying anything more, I'd be willing to bet otherwise. How much
are
you willing to lose?


Not a dime :) Care to elaborate ... :)


I am under an NDA, which I wouldn't break for love or money. So the answer
is no, I don't care to elaborate. Suffice to say everyone who has loved
Access for as long as I have should be pleased about most of Access 12.
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
Microsoft Access
Free Access downloads:
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access
Nov 13 '05 #22

P: n/a
Arvin Meyer wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...

Without saying anything more, I'd be willing to bet otherwise. How much
are
you willing to lose?


Not a dime :) Care to elaborate ... :)

I am under an NDA, which I wouldn't break for love or money. So the answer
is no, I don't care to elaborate. Suffice to say everyone who has loved
Access for as long as I have should be pleased about most of Access 12.


Any idea when Access 12 gold will be released?
Any chance of getting an Access 12 beta?

Bob Alston
Nov 13 '05 #23

P: n/a
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 02:49:16 GMT, David W. Fenton
<dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 02:38:32 GMT, David W. Fenton
<dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:

I have no inside info, but, my speculation based on MS history
and recent developments is that Access will continue in the
next version of Office, however, VBA as we know it will be
dead, replaced by VB.Net (VBA.Net?), DAO will be gone, replaced
by ADO.Net, and Jet will be replaced by the new SQL Server 2005
Personal Edition, if MS can get it all playing together in time
for a late 2005 release.

Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.
"Support" for Jet is already gone. See definition of
"Deprecated".


In this context, "support" meant "Access reads and writes Jet files"
not "Microsoft provides customer support for Jet."
That would mean forcing everyone to ADPs, and that just ain't
gonna happen.


Jumping to conclusion. MS has come up with many new technologies
over the years; just because DAO and Jet go does not mean that
ADP is the only alternative.


So, you're suggesting that MS would:

1. abandon Jet support in Access (and thus, ship an Access that
doesn't read or write MDB files)


Why does jettisoning Jet mean that it abandons Jet? Access has not
abandoned Oracle, has it?

2. instead of promoting the existing alternate file format, ADP
(which MS claims is Jetless, though I have my doubts on that), a
format that has been through several versions since it was
introduced in A2K, MS would create a brand-new file format that
didn't use Jet in order to, well, in order to *what*?
Well, I've looked at the new SQL Computer Manager that is supoosed to be
the GUI for SQL Server Express. I cannot seriously believe that MS
intends to develop a 3rd database GUI from scratch, when the Access GUI is
available. That the demo version is so underdeveloped at this stage seems
to bolster that, although I will admit that sometimes MS has appearred to
be going nowhere and then quickly come out with a full-blown product.

Word has not seen a meaningful change since Word97.
Yes, Word has become a commodity product that can no longer stand on it's
own. It is included with MS Works, for free on almost every new computer,
and only a fool would buy a standalone version. Sort of like Internet
Explorer. So where's the profit from that?

3. the version after that will make MSDE the default db engine,
but will continue to support Jet natively, and will continue to
do so forever. That means DAO will live as long as Jet is in
Access.


MSDE is a dead horse. SQL Server 2005 (personal Edition) . . .


Well, when I use the term "MSDE," I mean what MS insists on calling
"SQL Server xxxx Personal Edition." It's a shorter abbreviation, and
it means exactly the same thing.


MSDE is not the same as SQL Server 2005 (oops - actual name for the single
CPU version is "Express Edition"

"SQL Server Express replaces Microsoft SQL Server Desktop Engine (MSDE) in
SQL Server 2005 and provides numerous ease-of-use features that enable it
to be used by a non-professional developer or hobbyist. MSDE is based on
SQL 2000 technology and is recommended for use with Windows 9x platforms,
while SQL Server Express is based on SQL Server 2005 technology. SQL
Server Express has features such as Application XCopy, Robust Setup UI,
CLR support, GUI tools, and Visual Studio Integration that is not present
in MSDE. However, some features are removed from SQL Server Express
compared to MSDE. These features include DTS, replication publishing, and
SQL Agent.

The use of merge modules for deployment has been a servicing problem for
MSDE, and this functionality is not available in SQL Server Express. The
workload throttle in MSDE was sometimes difficult to understand and use.
In SQL Server Express, the throttle is removed and instead the engine uses
CPU, RAM, and database size limitations to differentiate it from the other
editions. The table below shows the comparison of these products."
SQL Server Express 2005 -- MSDE 2000
Application XCopy support Feature not present
No DTS ----------------- DTS runtime present
Easy deployment because of no MDAC MDAC is part of install
MSI only, good servicing story MSI and MSM, servicing of MSM hard
Client Replication for Transactional, Merge, and snapshot Merge/snapshot
publication supported in addition to replication subscription
Robust Setup UI--------- Basic setup UI
No agent---------------- Agent present
Supports Windows 2000 SP4, Windows XP SP1, and Windows 2003 --Supports
Windows 98, Windows Me, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows NT4, and Windows
2003
CLR support------------- No CLR support
GUI tools provided------ No GUI tools
Database size limit: 4G-- Database size limit: 2G
1 CPU, 1GB RAM---------- 2 CPU, 2GB RAM
No throttle------------- Workload throttle enforced
Deep integration with Visual Studio- Basic integration with Visual Studio

[Couldn't reproduce the chart well but it is here:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...eoverview.asp]
. . . will
soon replace it. Otherwise, there would have been no logical
reason to develop the personal (single CPU) edition.


There's more to it than just the limitation to a single CPU.


Yes, but not as much as you seem to think.
Removing Jet from Access would mean Access no longer existed.


Access was still Access without macros, wasn't it? Access is
still Access without Jet. What makes Access "Access" is the GUI,
without which very few would have ever picked it up.


MS could slap the word "Access" on any product it chose. That
doesn't make it the product that they've been shipping. Jet is so
central to Access that Access without it would not really be the
same tool. MSDE is simply *not* a replacement for Jet, as it's more
complex to install and administer and takes up far, far more
resources.


SQL Express *Will* have a GUI, and the intention of MS in this area seems
obvious, that they are attempting to make SQL Express as easy to use as
Access/Jet. MSDE has nothing to do with it.

As to more resources, that argument has long since been debunked. Windows
3.1 was doomed because it took up more resources. So was Java. So was
Windows 95. And on and on. Hardware catches up to, and surpasses.
And the differences between ADPs and MDBs are stark -- ADPs are far
from offering the same functionality and ease of use as MDBs.

Darryl Kerkeslager
Nov 13 '05 #24

P: n/a
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 02:52:11 GMT, David W. Fenton
<dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 23:27:01 GMT, Tony Toews
<tt****@telusplanet.net> wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:

> Abandoning support for DAO and Jet would require abandoning all
> support for the MDB/MDE, since those are Jet databases.

"Support" for Jet is already gone. See definition of
"Deprecated".

The phrases I have seen were in relation to MDAC. Thus I'd read
that as Jet is
deprecated from MDAC. But not from Access.

Well, okay, that's true, but I'm missing the importance of the
distinction. If Jet is no longer part of future data access
components that are installed by default with the OS, then it is
"on the way out". . . .


In 1996, Jet was not installed as part of the OS, and most of the
future of Jet was still ahead of it.
. . . It is no longer being developed - like ADO,
and DAO. Or Windows 98. Or NT.


But MS still uses Jet in lots of products, including Access, and
will continue to do so for a long time.


Your opinion, my opinion.

If XP version 2005 (2006?) includes SQL Server with every
installation, what is the need for Jet? Really - why have it at
all, if the OS already has a database?


Longhorn isn't going to include SQL Server -- WinFS may not even
ship with the original version of Longhorn.

Secondly, if you ship Access without a db engine, then what do the
people who aren't running Longhorn do?
Download it ... sort of like they do with the .Net framework, SP2, etc.
Based on the consistently idiotic things you post in the newsgroup,
I'm beginning to suspect that you are actually Don Mellon in one of
his many disguises.


Good god, David, can't you have a conversation without a personal attack?
I, my wife, my family, my brothers, my sister, my co-workers - yes, we're
all real people, and even though we may not be talking face-to-face, is
there any reason to treat any other person with such disrespect? This is
the same attitude that lets drivers run you off the road while staring
blankly forward as if you don't exist.

Darryl Kerkeslager

Nov 13 '05 #25

P: n/a
"Bob Alston" wrote
Any idea when Access 12 gold will be released?
Microsoft has not announced any dates for the next version of Office (which
includes Access). I don't expect them to announce the dates in the very near
future.
Any chance of getting an Access 12 beta?


Customers have been beta testers on all versions of Office/Access (even back
on Version 1 -- I knew a person who developed a substantial application for
the public sector in the V1 beta, and had it ready to market within days or
weeks after the release of Access 1).

I don't have the contact information, but visiting the Microsoft web site
and doing some searching might tell you how to sign up. (And, I'd have to
caution that just signing up is no guarantee of being invited to be a beta
tester.) I have not read a Microsoft announcement of a beta test being
currently in progress for the next version of Access.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP

Nov 13 '05 #26

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:
The phrases I have seen were in relation to MDAC. Thus I'd read that as
Jet is
deprecated from MDAC. But not from Access.

Well, okay, that's true, but I'm missing the importance of the
distinction. If Jet is no longer part of future data access components
that are installed by default with the OS, then it is "on the way out".
It is no longer being developed - like ADO, and DAO. Or Windows 98. Or
NT.


To me this means that the control of Jet is back in the Access team. Rather than
being done by the MS "Data" team whatever that is.
If XP version 2005 (2006?) includes SQL Server with every installation,
what is the need for Jet? Really - why have it at all, if the OS already
has a database?


It's still going to be necessary for backwards compatibility. Even if MS freezes
Jet development completely you'll still be able to use Jet.

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
Nov 13 '05 #27

P: n/a
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote:
Based on the consistently idiotic things you post in the newsgroup,
I'm beginning to suspect that you are actually Don Mellon in one of
his many disguises.


1) Darryl does not come across as DPM at all.

2) I feel his questions are quite valid.

3) I feel that the use of the term idiotic is inappropriate.

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
Nov 13 '05 #28

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:
If XP version 2005 (2006?) includes SQL Server with every installation,
what is the need for Jet? Really - why have it at all, if the OS already
has a database?


The migration to SQL Server would have to be easier. It's not at all seamless now.
Well for simple databases maybe.

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
Nov 13 '05 #29

P: n/a
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 22:44:18 GMT, Tony Toews <tt****@telusplanet.net>
wrote:
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote:
The phrases I have seen were in relation to MDAC. Thus I'd read that
as
Jet is
deprecated from MDAC. But not from Access.

Well, okay, that's true, but I'm missing the importance of the
distinction. If Jet is no longer part of future data access components
that are installed by default with the OS, then it is "on the way out".
It is no longer being developed - like ADO, and DAO. Or Windows 98. Or
NT.


To me this means that the control of Jet is back in the Access team.
Rather than
being done by the MS "Data" team whatever that is.
If XP version 2005 (2006?) includes SQL Server with every installation,
what is the need for Jet? Really - why have it at all, if the OS
already
has a database?


It's still going to be necessary for backwards compatibility. Even if
MS freezes
Jet development completely you'll still be able to use Jet.

God I hope so. I've got too much invested in this already. And of
course, I consider now that maybe "the next version" was perhaps too soon.

Darryl Kerkeslager
Nov 13 '05 #30

P: n/a
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:op**************@tigger.cnorth01.va.comcast.n et...

God I hope so. I've got too much invested in this already. And of
course, I consider now that maybe "the next version" was perhaps too soon.


If it makes you feel any better, I fully expect to be using Access the same
way I now do for at least the next 5 years. That's a prediction, not
anything that I'd bet more than I already have (my business) on. Keep you
eyes and ears open to your clients, not us ... or anyone else, for the
direction you need to take. You can bet that Microsoft will never break
everything to go to a new version without plenty of warning. If you go by
past performance, they will maintain backwards compatibility for
extraordinary periods of time.
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
Microsoft Access
Free Access downloads:
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access
Nov 13 '05 #31

P: n/a
Thanks for this interesting discussion.

It was very informative to read all the articles which will give me
many good facts for future discussions with our customers.

Thanks to all again.

Uwe
Nov 13 '05 #32

P: n/a
ur****@gmx.de (Uwe Range) wrote:
Thanks for this interesting discussion.

It was very informative to read all the articles which will give me
many good facts for future discussions with our customers.


<chuckle> One simple question and look how much discussion it raises. Well, maybe
the question wasn't so simple.

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
Nov 13 '05 #33

P: n/a
DFS
What they need to improve is the reliability and stability of the code
modules.

I don't have problems with the tables or forms or anything else but the
code. Every Access 2003 front-end system I build - and I mean 100% - goes
corrupt on me once it reaches an arbitrary but fairly large size. They
generally recover ok, but sometimes I have to create new files and import
objects.

SP1, generally using the DAO 3.6 library


Tony Toews wrote:
ur****@gmx.de (Uwe Range) wrote:

A few articles and quotes.

http://msaccessadvisor.com/doc/14978

"Microsoft vice president Richard McAniff said Microsoft Access now
has the largest development team since the product's original
creation. "

"the development team at Microsoft tells us its highest priority for
Access 12 is improved usability. Microsoft wants to make it easier
than ever to create Access applications. Microsoft Access lead
program manager Clint Covington says, "You'll find a strategic
commitment to radically upgrade the quality of Access applications by
improving the core forms and reports experience, using Jet as the
query processor."

http://msaccessadvisor.com/doc/14850

Microsoft Access is only getting better

"One concern that Richard addressed head-on was the widespread
uncertainty over whether Microsoft still values Access. He told us
that it definitely does (and Jet too!) and is backing that up with a
big budget for development on the next version. In fact, I learned
that one reason we couldn't see more at the conference was that there
are several patents are pending on new technology being added to
Access! Enhancements to SharePoint integration with Access will only
strengthen the importance of Access as a strategic Microsoft product,
and that will help all Access developers."

Tony

Nov 13 '05 #34

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.