Why choose SQL Express over Access?

[ljh]

Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies?

[Frans Bouma [C# MVP]]

ljh wrote:

Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
application to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which
has no dependencies?

If you already know the answer, why ask the question?

Furthermore, MS doesn't include the JET engine anymore in the MDAC
installations (if I'm not mistaken), something to consider in your
decision. (which means effectively, that they want to keep people from
using .mdb files as a database for an application which isn't build in
MS Access, as the JET engine is only distributed with Office today (if
I'm not mistaken).

FB

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lead developer of LLBLGen Pro, the productive O/R mapper for .NET
LLBLGen Pro website: http://www.llblgen.com
My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
Microsoft MVP (C#)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Miha Markic [MVP C#]]

Hi Sahil,

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment".

You still have to install jet engine though (dll hell, registry, com, you
name it)...
Or did you mean FBD for database files?

BTW, i liked the pig anecdote :-)

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#]
RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/

[ljh]

I'm not so sure about that.

Isn't the MDAC just a related set of DLLs? In many cases, you can simply
place dependent DLLs in the same directory as your exe and all will run just
fine - no registering amything and no chance that "DLL Hell" (which I don't
believe exists) can getcha.

I may try this out myself on a clean box and see......

"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:e8**************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Hi Sahil,

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment".

You still have to install jet engine though (dll hell, registry, com, you
name it)...
Or did you mean FBD for database files?

BTW, i liked the pig anecdote :-)

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#]
RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

pig anecdote?

Re: the jet engine etc. - yeah but most machines have it.

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
http://blah.winsmarts.com

"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:e8**************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Hi Sahil,

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment".

You still have to install jet engine though (dll hell, registry, com, you
name it)...
Or did you mean FBD for database files?

BTW, i liked the pig anecdote :-)

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#]
RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/

[Robert Simpson]

The latest version of the SQLite ADO.NET 2.0 Provider is 1.0.29.0. I must
really be doing something wrong if nobody knows about it. Maybe I need to
hire a PR guy :)

The SQLite ADO.NET 2.0 provider's VS2005 integration is pretty good (and
better than most other 3rd party databases that integrate into VS2005 -- and
the only one I know of outside MS that lets you design for the Compact
Framework), but its still incomplete. I am working on implementing all the
editors to enable you to actually design tables, indexes, keys, views etc.

Here's a movie I did demo'ing the VS2005 design-time support in the 2.0
provider for SQLite. It's based on a much older version of the program, so
isn't quite as fancy as it is now:

http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com/sqlite.wmv

And do yourself a favor -- hit the main website and read the forums! I have
lots of how-to's, and have a pretty good track record for answering
questions there :)

http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com

Robert Simpson
Programmer at Large


"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:7e*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..

I was looking at the site () and came across "Version 1.0.14 of the SQLite
.Net Data Provider for ADO.NET 2.0/VS 2005 is out and includes design-time
support. You can now create databases, design queries, and drag-and-drop
tables to create typed datasets within Visual Studio 2005. "

Is this capability still in there? I didn't see any examples of this. If
SQLite is as easy to use as this quote seems to make it (i.e. as easy to
use in the ide as SQL Express) we may just have a winner here.
"JimD" <Ji*@keeliegirl.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:yu*****************@tornado.tampabay.rr.com.. .

JimD wrote:

<snip>

I forgot to mention about the connection string in the example. The
connection string is:

Data Source=database.db;Version=3;New=True;Compress=Tru e;

The New=True token says to create a new database. So every time you run
the test program, you are creating a new database, overwriting the old.
You probably don't want to do that with a real application. So you
would only use the New=True in a connection string when you want to
create a database for the first time. After that, you can either remove
New=True or change it to New=False.
Jim
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
JimD
Central FL, USA, Earth, Sol

[Miha Markic [MVP C#]]

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <co*****************@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

pig anecdote?
"Bill, it took me a while to realize this, but I think you're wrestling with
a pig. He is enjoying it, and you're getting dirty. "
Re: the jet engine etc. - yeah but most machines have it.

It is enough if one (target) machine might be missing jet. :-)

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#]
RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/

[ljh]

I think that what you have done thus far is fantastic. Something I probably
never will accomplish myself.

My problem is one of time constraints. I am not a DBA, don't want to be
one. I have to look after 15 small business networks and am embarking on
writing 3 applications and volunteering some time at a local center for
mentally challenged adults. Thats a lot of juggling to do every day.

The ease in which you can add a table in SQL\e (i.e. right click the db and
select Add Table - name it and start doing almost the same thing with the
columns) lends itself more to RAD development (and the juggling that I have
to do) than having to type in the create statements for each table.

I know it sounds minor, but for me it isn't. 2 of the 3 apps have no clear
documentation. Primarily becasue the client wants to develop something "as
we go along". So, (in this particular level of programming hell) the more
RAD the better.

I just like the idea of right click and add. It enables my bad coding
practices....but it keeps the clients happy - esp during prototyping.

Does that make designing an app while you code it a good example to follow?
Certainly not! It is atrocious. But, it is my task for one of my larger
clients.

The small size of SQLite is amazing. And the ease of deployment is a dream
come true.

I'll keep playing with it and see what I can come up with......

Thanks for all of your hard work!

ljh

"Robert Simpson" <rm*******@noemail.noemail> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

The latest version of the SQLite ADO.NET 2.0 Provider is 1.0.29.0. I must
really be doing something wrong if nobody knows about it. Maybe I need to
hire a PR guy :)

The SQLite ADO.NET 2.0 provider's VS2005 integration is pretty good (and
better than most other 3rd party databases that integrate into VS2005 --
and the only one I know of outside MS that lets you design for the Compact
Framework), but its still incomplete. I am working on implementing all
the editors to enable you to actually design tables, indexes, keys, views
etc.

Here's a movie I did demo'ing the VS2005 design-time support in the 2.0
provider for SQLite. It's based on a much older version of the program,
so isn't quite as fancy as it is now:

http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com/sqlite.wmv

And do yourself a favor -- hit the main website and read the forums! I
have lots of how-to's, and have a pretty good track record for answering
questions there :)

http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com

Robert Simpson
Programmer at Large


"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:7e*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..

I was looking at the site () and came across "Version 1.0.14 of the SQLite
.Net Data Provider for ADO.NET 2.0/VS 2005 is out and includes design-time
support. You can now create databases, design queries, and drag-and-drop
tables to create typed datasets within Visual Studio 2005. "

Is this capability still in there? I didn't see any examples of this.
If SQLite is as easy to use as this quote seems to make it (i.e. as easy
to use in the ide as SQL Express) we may just have a winner here.
"JimD" <Ji*@keeliegirl.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:yu*****************@tornado.tampabay.rr.com.. .

JimD wrote:

<snip>

I forgot to mention about the connection string in the example. The
connection string is:

Data Source=database.db;Version=3;New=True;Compress=Tru e;

The New=True token says to create a new database. So every time you run
the test program, you are creating a new database, overwriting the old.
You probably don't want to do that with a real application. So you
would only use the New=True in a connection string when you want to
create a database for the first time. After that, you can either remove
New=True or change it to New=False.
Jim
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
JimD
Central FL, USA, Earth, Sol

[Frank Rizzo]

steve wrote:

Frank,
Can you point to something that documents your assertion that SQL Express
does not run on XP Home? Runs fine on my XP Home test machine....Haven't
been able to test access across a network to SQL/e on XP Home.
Steve,

I stand corrected. I just looked at the requirements page:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/edition...s/sysreqs.mspx

and they just mention windows xp. The page must have changed, because
other people complained about it. Here is an article from database
journal when SQL Express came out says winxp pro.
http://www.databasejournal.com/featu...le.php/3492296

I guess they changed it.



"Frank Rizzo" <no**@none.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
anyway.

There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home Edition,
while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are targeting
mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick to MSDE.

Regards

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Especially if that one machine is the CEO's laptop.

SM
"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <co*****************@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

pig anecdote?

"Bill, it took me a while to realize this, but I think you're wrestling
with
a pig. He is enjoying it, and you're getting dirty. "

Re: the jet engine etc. - yeah but most machines have it.

It is enough if one (target) machine might be missing jet. :-)

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#]
RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/

[r norman]

On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 15:25:02 -0400, "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]"
<co*****************@nospam.com> wrote:

"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <co*****************@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Re: the jet engine etc. - yeah but most machines have it.

It is enough if one (target) machine might be missing jet. :-)

Especially if that one machine is the CEO's laptop.

Microsoft used to have an older Access jet engine available for
download. My impression is that they stopped when they incorporated
it into most operating systems. Do you know of any specific
platforms that do not have it?

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Miha is right .. it's more than just "copying a few DLLs".

SM

"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:0G*******************@bignews8.bellsouth.net. ..

I'm not so sure about that.

Isn't the MDAC just a related set of DLLs? In many cases, you can simply
place dependent DLLs in the same directory as your exe and all will run
just fine - no registering amything and no chance that "DLL Hell" (which I
don't believe exists) can getcha.

I may try this out myself on a clean box and see......

"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:e8**************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Hi Sahil,

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment".

You still have to install jet engine though (dll hell, registry, com, you
name it)...
Or did you mean FBD for database files?

BTW, i liked the pig anecdote :-)

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#]
RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/

[steve]

Frank,

We had just about decided to use SQL Express for our next project when I saw
your post. Since we need to support XP Home and Pro, I was a bit concerned
and just wanted to make sure we were making the right choice.

Steve
"Frank Rizzo" <no**@none.com> wrote in message
news:Oh**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

steve wrote:

Frank,
Can you point to something that documents your assertion that SQL Express
does not run on XP Home? Runs fine on my XP Home test machine....Haven't
been able to test access across a network to SQL/e on XP Home.

Steve,

I stand corrected. I just looked at the requirements page:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/edition...s/sysreqs.mspx

and they just mention windows xp. The page must have changed, because
other people complained about it. Here is an article from database
journal when SQL Express came out says winxp pro.
http://www.databasejournal.com/featu...le.php/3492296

I guess they changed it.

"Frank Rizzo" <no**@none.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
anyway.
There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home
Edition, while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are
targeting mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick to
MSDE.

Regards

[William \(Bill\) Vaughn]

SQL Express is supported on all versions of XP. See:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/edition...s/sysreqs.mspx

--
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________

"steve" <noemail> wrote in message
news:%2***************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Frank,

We had just about decided to use SQL Express for our next project when I
saw your post. Since we need to support XP Home and Pro, I was a bit
concerned and just wanted to make sure we were making the right choice.

Steve
"Frank Rizzo" <no**@none.com> wrote in message
news:Oh**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

steve wrote:

Frank,
Can you point to something that documents your assertion that SQL
Express does not run on XP Home? Runs fine on my XP Home test
machine....Haven't been able to test access across a network to SQL/e on
XP Home.

Steve,

I stand corrected. I just looked at the requirements page:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/edition...s/sysreqs.mspx

and they just mention windows xp. The page must have changed, because
other people complained about it. Here is an article from database
journal when SQL Express came out says winxp pro.
http://www.databasejournal.com/featu...le.php/3492296

I guess they changed it.

"Frank Rizzo" <no**@none.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all
> these name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish
> applications anyway.
There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home
Edition, while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are
targeting mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick
to MSDE.

Regards

[ljh]

Speaking of Borland....

I remembered this discussion when I read yesterday that Borland is getting
out of the IDE business altogether. Chief Borland evangelist David
Intersomine announced the company's plans to spin off the IDE product line
way back in February on his blog at
http://blogs.borland.com/davidi/arch.../08/23013.aspx.

In the blog, David seems to indicate that Borland is simply starting a new
company for this line of Borland's products, but the magazine PC Plus (issue
242) says that Borland has been shopping for a buyer for the IDE business
lines since February and that tension is mounting as core people leave the
company because of Borland's lack of commitment to its developer tools
products.

I don't really see how it could have played out any differently. IMHO, most
people that choose to go .Net will not keep thier old language while doing
so. I mean, what's the point? Just make the move and be done with it.

Well, just thought you'd like to know....

"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:_M*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..

You're right..... I got Sybase and Borland mixed up. Must've been that
whole JBuilder collaboration thing that threw me.

They are definitely not the same company.

"Frank Rizzo" <no**@none.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

ljh wrote:

I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.

The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) -
http://www.sybase.com/products/mobil...ns/sqlanywhere .

Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll
never amount to anything. However, I used the product a couple of years
ago and it is solid. It has all the drivers and easy of use and
surprising performance and all that.

I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the

I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland. You got your
vendors confused.

whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they
have abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.

They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be
about it.

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <co*****************@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:uA**************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Short incomplete list of reasons -

- SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
users.
- It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
- It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
backups *.*)
- It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
better T-SQL*.*
- It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
- You won't have to compact it as often
- Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
- Other reasons.

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
anyway.

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..
> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
> application to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which
> has no dependencies?
>
>
>

[bob]

The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!

I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

Short incomplete list of reasons -

- SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
users.
- It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
- It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
backups *.*)
- It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, better
T-SQL*.*
- It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
- You won't have to compact it as often
- Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
- Other reasons.

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And frankly
SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway.

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..

Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
dependencies?

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting over
the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)

- Sahil Malik [MVP]
http://blah.winsmarts.com

<bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...

The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!

I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

Short incomplete list of reasons -

- SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
users.
- It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
- It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
backups *.*)
- It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
better
T-SQL*.*
- It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
- You won't have to compact it as often
- Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
- Other reasons.

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
frankly
SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway.

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..

> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
> application
> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
> dependencies?
>
>
>

[Miro]

A quick question...

An mdb file lets you supply a password - so you can only allow your
application from accessing / viewing the data.

Can you do this with SQL Express / Light / ... other ?

I am starting to get the feeling you cannot lock down the db with SQL
Express as you can a normal mdb?

Thank you

Miro

"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..

Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
dependencies?

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

SQL Express can be locked down - much like a SQL Server can be.

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
http://blah.winsmarts.com
"Miro" <mi******@golden.net> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

A quick question...

An mdb file lets you supply a password - so you can only allow your
application from accessing / viewing the data.

Can you do this with SQL Express / Light / ... other ?

I am starting to get the feeling you cannot lock down the db with SQL
Express as you can a normal mdb?

Thank you

Miro

"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..

Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
dependencies?

[Bob]

Sahil --

Excellent idea! I wrestled for a long time with trying to use Access
and when the match was over, I realized that getting Access to work
under "OleDb" was as hard or harder than just learning SQL!! I am now
riding the helicopter and -- you absolutely won't believe this -- had a
bad dream last night that I WAS in a helicopter and just barely
avoiding crashing into trees, buildings, and power lines.

btw, I arrived at your web site along the way in my Access/Sql travels,
and found your code about creating databases and tables in SQL using
VB.NET very helpful. Thanks so much.
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting over
the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)

- Sahil Malik [MVP]
http://blah.winsmarts.com

<bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...

The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!

I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

Short incomplete list of reasons -

- SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
users.
- It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
- It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
backups *.*)
- It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
better
T-SQL*.*
- It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
- You won't have to compact it as often
- Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
- Other reasons.

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
frankly
SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway.

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..
> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
> application
> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
> dependencies?
>
>
>

[Bob]

Sahil --

After writing my last reply to your message, I still can't believe that
I had the helicopter dream last night. I rode in a helicopter once in
my life, and that was about 30 years ago. I have NEVER (that I can
remember) ever had a helicopter dream -- until last night. I haven't
checked the time of your message, but I suspect that my dream must have
occurred after you wrote me your message. I really wonder if there is
some "medium" out there that carries brain waves around, or something,
whereby my subconcious received some glint of your thought before I
actually read it. WOW!

btw, what does "MSFT" stand for?

Thanks,
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting over
the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)

- Sahil Malik [MVP]
http://blah.winsmarts.com

<bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...

The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!

I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

Short incomplete list of reasons -

- SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
users.
- It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
- It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
backups *.*)
- It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
better
T-SQL*.*
- It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
- You won't have to compact it as often
- Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
- Other reasons.

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
frankly
SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway.

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
"ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..
> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
> application
> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
> dependencies?
>
>
>

[Daniel Billingsley]

Microsoft.

"Bob" <bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@p79g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com...

btw, what does "MSFT" stand for?

Thanks,

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Thanks Bob :)

I just got back from TechED, and yes, you do need a helicopter, and don't
worry, we are all barely avoiding trees/buildings/power lines :)

I am glad you found the code helpful.
--

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
http://blah.winsmarts.com

"Bob" <bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@f6g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...

Sahil --

Excellent idea! I wrestled for a long time with trying to use Access
and when the match was over, I realized that getting Access to work
under "OleDb" was as hard or harder than just learning SQL!! I am now
riding the helicopter and -- you absolutely won't believe this -- had a
bad dream last night that I WAS in a helicopter and just barely
avoiding crashing into trees, buildings, and power lines.

btw, I arrived at your web site along the way in my Access/Sql travels,
and found your code about creating databases and tables in SQL using
VB.NET very helpful. Thanks so much.
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting
over
the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)

- Sahil Malik [MVP]
http://blah.winsmarts.com

<bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...

>
> The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!
>
> I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
> learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
> to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
>
>
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> Short incomplete list of reasons -
>>
>> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
>> users.
>> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
>> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
>> backups *.*)
>> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
>> better
>> T-SQL*.*
>> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
>> - You won't have to compact it as often
>> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
>> - Other reasons.
>>
>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
>> frankly
>> SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
>> changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
>> anyway.
>>
>> - Sahil Malik
>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>> "ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..
>> > Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
>> > application
>> > to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
>> > dependencies?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

There is indeed a mathematical principal behind all that goes on in this
world, Neo. ;-)

- Sahil Malik
http://www.winsmarts.com
http://blah.winsmarts.com


"Bob" <bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@p79g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com...

Sahil --

After writing my last reply to your message, I still can't believe that
I had the helicopter dream last night. I rode in a helicopter once in
my life, and that was about 30 years ago. I have NEVER (that I can
remember) ever had a helicopter dream -- until last night. I haven't
checked the time of your message, but I suspect that my dream must have
occurred after you wrote me your message. I really wonder if there is
some "medium" out there that carries brain waves around, or something,
whereby my subconcious received some glint of your thought before I
actually read it. WOW!

btw, what does "MSFT" stand for?

Thanks,
Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:

With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting
over
the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)

- Sahil Malik [MVP]
http://blah.winsmarts.com

<bo*@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...

>
> The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!
>
> I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
> learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
> to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
>
>
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> Short incomplete list of reasons -
>>
>> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
>> users.
>> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
>> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
>> backups *.*)
>> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
>> better
>> T-SQL*.*
>> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
>> - You won't have to compact it as often
>> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
>> - Other reasons.
>>
>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
>> frankly
>> SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
>> changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
>> anyway.
>>
>> - Sahil Malik
>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>> "ljh" <So**@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:kP*******************@bignews3.bellsouth.net. ..
>> > Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
>> > application
>> > to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
>> > dependencies?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>

[bradwiseathome]

Are there any comparisons/tests for concurrent usage that show SQLite
to behave better than Access? I haven't looked at Access as a database
for a web app since the ASP classic days, and I like what SQLite has to
offer, but want to be sure I won't end up with the same problems that
Access is notorious for. One thing that Access has in its favor is that
the DB can be copied to a client's PC and you can be sure they can
check out the contents with Office.
Peter wrote:

If you really are looking for a lightweight, fast, no - deployment database
then why not look into SQLite? There's an ADO.NET and an ADO.NET 2.0 provider
(thanks to Robert Simpson) and it screams compared to MS Access. Not even an
MDAC dependency.
Peter

--
Co-founder, Eggheadcafe.com developer portal:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com
UnBlog:
http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com


"ljh" wrote:

Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies?

[Robert Simpson]

<br************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@i40g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...

Are there any comparisons/tests for concurrent usage that show SQLite
to behave better than Access? I haven't looked at Access as a database
for a web app since the ASP classic days, and I like what SQLite has to
offer, but want to be sure I won't end up with the same problems that
Access is notorious for. One thing that Access has in its favor is that
the DB can be copied to a client's PC and you can be sure they can
check out the contents with Office.

There are an equally large number of people that consider that "feature" a
showstopper and a nightmare :)

I have a few SQLite vs. Access/Firebird/Vista/Sql Express benchmarks here:
http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com/forums/622/ShowPost.aspx

As for the rest ... you'll find a features overview (as it pertains to the
ADO.NET 2.0 provider) at the main site:
http://sqlite.phxsoftware.com

Robert