By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,667 Members | 2,214 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,667 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Is MS Access A Toy?

P: n/a
Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman on a
CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access for
maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe guns, maybe
chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases) but whatever it
was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said something like, "that
agency has said they have kept track of it in Access. Can you believe
Access?" It was as if she was saying that for something as important as
'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be serious if they were keeping track
of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access, would Access be
considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking 'whatever' for the US
Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she wanted 'whatever' tracked
in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary differences between Access and 'The
Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be the difference between a pickup truck and a
semi tractor trailer or a Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess I'm also
asking when would it be prudent and necessary to move from Access to
something more 'powerful' or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or 'stable'
or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson


Apr 22 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
12 Replies


P: n/a
Earl Anderson wrote:
Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman on a
CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access for
maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe guns, maybe
chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases) but whatever it
was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said something like, "that
agency has said they have kept track of it in Access. Can you believe
Access?" It was as if she was saying that for something as important as
'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be serious if they were keeping track
of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access, would Access be
considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking 'whatever' for the US
Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she wanted 'whatever' tracked
in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary differences between Access and 'The
Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be the difference between a pickup truck and a
semi tractor trailer or a Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess I'm also
asking when would it be prudent and necessary to move from Access to
something more 'powerful' or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or 'stable'
or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson

How fast is Access when the file size is over 2 gigabyte?
Apr 22 '07 #2

P: n/a
No, it's not a toy. No, it doesn't have all the features of server
databases.

The Jet engine and the current Access 2007 DB engine that is derived from
Jet are installed by default, and they are file-server database engines.
Details of the difference between server and file-server databases have been
discussed many times -- you should get more information than you probably
want on that subject if you search the archives of this newsgroup at
http://groups.google.com.

And, MS SQL Server, Oracle, and other server DBs have logging features that
improve recoverability in case of hardware, network, or software errors
(could be other software that brings a system down).

It's a very good software program for "tracking" things, where the
timeliness of recovery is not as stringent as in some "transaction",
"real-time", "mission critical (e.g., 24/7/365) applications. Further,
Access is a superb, superior tool for creating the user interface part of
client-server applications which use the "more robust" server DBs to store
the data -- when it does not depend on the file-server database engine to
store its data, it gains the advantages of the server DBs, and retains the
advantage that there is no faster, easier way to create a client application
for DB work than Access because it is designed for DB work. Most computer
languages used to create the client application are general application
generators and lack specific database-centric operations.

As you might guess, when you compare the included Jet / Access database
engine (which come along as part of the less-than-US$1,000 Office
Professional software) to server databases which cost thousands, or hundreds
of thousands, you'll find the server databases have additional capacity for
storage, and (only in some cases) better performance. Of course, you don't
go out and buy a cluster of server machines to run Access with Jet / Access
DBs, either. (The Access / Jet database engine has a maximum of 2GB
capacity, but Access also has the capability of concurrently being linked to
more than one Access / Jet database to allow more than 2 GB -- few
experienced Access users/developers, however, would recommend you use
multiple linked databases other than as a temporary expedient while
converting your data storage to a server DB.)

Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP

"Earl Anderson" <is*****@optonline.netwrote in message
news:jM**************@newsfe12.lga...
Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman on
a CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access for
maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe guns,
maybe chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases) but
whatever it was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said something
like, "that agency has said they have kept track of it in Access. Can you
believe Access?" It was as if she was saying that for something as
important as 'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be serious if they were
keeping track of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access, would Access
be considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking 'whatever' for
the US Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she wanted 'whatever'
tracked in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary differences between Access
and 'The Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be the difference between a pickup
truck and a semi tractor trailer or a Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess
I'm also asking when would it be prudent and necessary to move from Access
to something more 'powerful' or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or
'stable' or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson


Apr 22 '07 #3

P: n/a
"Earl Anderson" <is*****@optonline.netwrote in
news:jM**************@newsfe12.lga:
First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access
I would say, roughly, zero was the level of her knowledge.

Or less.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Apr 22 '07 #4

P: n/a

"Earl Anderson" <is*****@optonline.netwrote in message
news:jM**************@newsfe12.lga...
Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman on
a
CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access for
maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe guns,
maybe
chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases) but whatever it
was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said something like, "that
agency has said they have kept track of it in Access. Can you believe
Access?" It was as if she was saying that for something as important as
'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be serious if they were keeping
track
of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access, would Access
be
considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking 'whatever' for the
US
Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she wanted 'whatever' tracked
in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary differences between Access and 'The
Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be the difference between a pickup truck and
a
semi tractor trailer or a Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess I'm also
asking when would it be prudent and necessary to move from Access to
something more 'powerful' or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or 'stable'
or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson

Would you use a semi tractor trailer to move 4 sheets of plywood from the
lumber yard, or a pickup truck to move drywall for an office building? What
would be the correct tool to fly you and a friend into a dirt strip in the
mountains for a fishing trip?

Access / Jet is a good tool for the right job. Access / SQL server is a good
tool for a bigger job.
Apr 23 '07 #5

P: n/a
Earl Anderson wrote:
Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman on a
CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access for
maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe guns, maybe
chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases) but whatever it
was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said something like, "that
agency has said they have kept track of it in Access. Can you believe
Access?" It was as if she was saying that for something as important as
'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be serious if they were keeping track
of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access, would Access be
considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking 'whatever' for the US
Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she wanted 'whatever' tracked
in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary differences between Access and 'The
Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be the difference between a pickup truck and a
semi tractor trailer or a Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess I'm also
asking when would it be prudent and necessary to move from Access to
something more 'powerful' or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or 'stable'
or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson
One needs a way to present the data to the end user or input the data.
Does it really matter what application is used?
Apr 23 '07 #6

P: n/a
Last Boy Scout wrote:
Earl Anderson wrote:
>Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman
on a CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access
for maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe
guns, maybe chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases)
but whatever it was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said
something like, "that agency has said they have kept track of it in
Access. Can you believe Access?" It was as if she was saying that for
something as important as 'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be
serious if they were keeping track of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing
what her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access,
would Access be considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking
'whatever' for the US Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she
wanted 'whatever' tracked in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary
differences between Access and 'The Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be
the difference between a pickup truck and a semi tractor trailer or a
Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess I'm also asking when would it be
prudent and necessary to move from Access to something more 'powerful'
or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or 'stable' or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson

How fast is Access when the file size is over 2 gigabyte?
What is the input/output medium to something like Oracle? If you have a
file of 10 gigabytes of data, its basically useless unless you have a
method of presenting the data.
Apr 23 '07 #7

P: n/a
I don't know if this is the application that was in question but a
government contractor (federal) implemented a voting application (federal
elections) with MS Access. The gafaw was about the absence of strong
security in Access (true) thus weakness protecting voter counts.

Regards KC

"Earl Anderson" <is*****@optonline.netwrote in message
news:jM**************@newsfe12.lga...
Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman on
a CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access for
maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe guns,
maybe chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases) but
whatever it was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said something
like, "that agency has said they have kept track of it in Access. Can you
believe Access?" It was as if she was saying that for something as
important as 'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be serious if they were
keeping track of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access, would Access
be considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking 'whatever' for
the US Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she wanted 'whatever'
tracked in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary differences between Access
and 'The Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be the difference between a pickup
truck and a semi tractor trailer or a Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess
I'm also asking when would it be prudent and necessary to move from Access
to something more 'powerful' or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or
'stable' or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson


Apr 23 '07 #8

P: n/a
dude don't listen to these crackheard

of COURSE Access is a toy

it should only be used if you're mentally handicapped, wheel-chair
bound.. or both

you need to move to Access Data Projects

On Apr 21, 6:02 pm, "Earl Anderson" <isob...@optonline.netwrote:
Recently, as I was 'flipping thru the TV channels', I heard some woman on a
CSpan show 'chiding' the federal government for using MS Access for
maintaining records on tracking something (I can't recall--maybe guns, maybe
chemicals, maybe cancer research, maybe it was AIDS cases) but whatever it
was, she snickered and 'poofed' twice as she said something like, "that
agency has said they have kept track of it in Access. Can you believe
Access?" It was as if she was saying that for something as important as
'whatever' it was, the Feds could not be serious if they were keeping track
of it in MS Access.

This brings two (2) immediate questions to mind. First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access, would Access be
considered as a less than 'serious' method of tracking 'whatever' for the US
Government (like a toy) and second, assuming she wanted 'whatever' tracked
in Oracle or SAP, what are the primary differences between Access and 'The
Big Boys'?--Would an analogy be the difference between a pickup truck and a
semi tractor trailer or a Piper Cub and a Boeing 747? I guess I'm also
asking when would it be prudent and necessary to move from Access to
something more 'powerful' or 'reliable' or 'faster' or larger' or 'stable'
or 'whatever'?

Thx...
Earl Anderson

Apr 23 '07 #9

P: n/a
of course, from a MDB-QUEER I don't put a lot of value in David's
assessment

MDB shouldn't be used BY ANYONE, FOR ANY REASON


On Apr 22, 11:26 am, "David W. Fenton" <XXXuse...@dfenton.com.invalid>
wrote:
"Earl Anderson" <isob...@optonline.netwrote innews:jM**************@newsfe12.lga:
First, not knowing what
her level of knowledge was as to the capabilities of Access

I would say, roughly, zero was the level of her knowledge.

Or less.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

Apr 23 '07 #10

P: n/a

"Susie DBA [MSFT]" <su******@hotmail.comwrote
dude don't listen to these crackheard
Susie DBA is an alias of a a r o n k e m p f, a troll who continues to make
a fool of himself in public here in the newsgroups. And, as is obvious to
most everyone, despite using the [MSFT] to impersonate one, Susie/a a r o n,
is not a Microsoft employee. Her/his words are intended to hurt Microsoft,
not to help you, so heed them at your own risk.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP
Apr 24 '07 #11

P: n/a
"Larry Linson" <bo*****@localhost.notwrote in
news:d1dXh.8354$no.5372@trnddc02:
Her/his words are intended to hurt Microsoft,
not to help you, so heed them at your own risk.
I think his words are intended to annoy *us*. He's another Don
Mellon, if not Don himself.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Apr 24 '07 #12

P: n/a
Hi All,

Just adding my 2cents worth here, but I thought it worth mentioning
that "security" is a very loosly used term by most people. It is
possible to use extremely high levels of security, inclusing AES 256
bit or IDEA or 3DES etc cryptography with an Access based application.
The "security" really comes down to how it is designed and used. The
idea is that you use appropriate levels of security for the risk
involved. I would suggest that some non-knowledgable (on the topics of
Access or Security or Cryptography) person is simply making a fuss
over something that suits their personal agenda or fears. The only way
to know if the application is secure or not is to have an appropraite
risk assessment done by security professionals, and then make an
informed decision.

I sounds like this is just someones political rantings. For what its
worth, a database is only as secure as you make it, even the "big"
ones like Oracle, SQL Server, etc...

Just some food for thought

Cheers

The Frog

Apr 26 '07 #13

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.