Re: adp vs mdb

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

Tne .NET framework is simply not relevant to Access development. The
only options for Access development are MDB and ADP, and Microsoft
has been recommending MDB over ADP for a couple of years now.

I think his point was that you might want to consider .NET as the front end
instead of Access, especially if you're doing Web/Intranet development. I
don't find .NET useful for much, personally, but it has its advantages in
some respects, so others may find it more useful for whatever they're doing.

The reason MS gives in their documentation is that ADPs have as many
or more layers between your front end and the database as MDBs do,
and those layers are no better at the job than Jet.

I've never seen a strong proof of this. Can you point me to something? I'm
not necessarily disagreeing, but I'd be curious to see more in-depth
analyses than I've seen out of MS to-date.

In the context of Access development, Microsoft has determined that
MDBs with ODBC perform better than ADPs, and they've changed their
recommendations to Access developers developers working with SQL
Server accordingly.

Don't forget, MS has a vested interest in this. They also claimed that
VB.NET was significantly faster than VB6 was, and it was true in a few
highly limited cases. But for most real-world tests, VB.NET proved to be
slower...sometimes quite significantly. MS has a "latest and greatest"
approach to things that doesn't always jive with the real world, so it's not
a good idea to simply take their word for it. Often, they're right, but
often they're trying to get you to buy their newest product, and skewing
things in that product's favour.

MS itself is now saying that MDBs are
better than ADPs. Given that this is a 180 degree reversal of their
position on the subject, it seems like a pretty good justification
for going with MDBs instead of ADPs

Actually, if anything, that makes me highly suspicious. While highlighting
the "latest and greatest" approach I mentioned before, the fact that they
would universally encourage everybody towards ADPs, then unequivocally urge
them back towards MDBs gives me serious cause to distrust their statements.
I'm not particularly anti-MS, but lately, it seems that a reversal of
position is common for them, and that's not a good sign.



Rob


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: adp vs mdb
    ... how is MDB linked tables LESS LAYERS than just OLEDB? ... only options for Access development are MDB and ADP, ... MDBs with ODBC perform better than ADPs, ...
    (microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver)
  • Re: AutoNumber feild
    ... and not using adps. ... mdbs, though bound to linked tables, is not it? ... >> I used to have autonumber in the form which gives the ... >> Is there any way to display the autonumber before the ...
    (microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver)
  • Re: Access awake after 7 years?
    ... I'm not sure I understand what the "idea" of ADPs was supposed to ... I don't see why MDBs couldn't have had features added to interface ... better with SQL Server, rather than throwing that out and starting ... Server front end solution) on the capabilities of ADO, ...
    (comp.databases.ms-access)
  • Re: Multiple Form_Current events in ADP projects with subforms
    ... have debug code in the Form_Current events of all the linked subforms. ... I think that ADPs are very different than MDBs, and it would be nice is we ... > being called multiple times? ...
    (microsoft.public.access.formscoding)