Re: Future of ADP's

Well Now... As I prepare to end the day I feel well sad, frustrated lost!
Should I get up in the morning? Like you all I have invested a lot of time
in the adp, the best feature for me is the close link with the stored
procedure to loose this would be a great shame and make me look at other
products - yes even outside microsoft. - In fact in the latest project I
have no tables just very keen fast sp's so for me to loose this power would
be a great shame and involve huge loss

I have in the mean time to come up with a plan to keep my sanity, and to
help me with this I need some advice or even examples of how to use oledb
from an mdb or accdb just NO ODBC its primative and makes access all that we
dont want it to be - a non enterprise product!

Please help me before I loose my marbles (If found please return to author)

Kindest regards to all adp lovers (an under estimated bunch with an
undervalued product)

John Hart

PS Microsoft give us some good news!

"Robert Morley" wrote:

Yes, I expect that's exactly what they'll do, if they aren't already in the
process of doing it. It's really frustrating, doubly so when you take into
account that only a few years ago, they were encouraging everybody to move
to the latest & greatest technology that was ADP's. And suddenly it's like,
"Oh, we're not excited about this any more, so if you took our advice of a
couple of years ago, you're up the creek now. We're not really even sorry
about it, cuz we've got something new that we're all excited about now."

I think MS needs the corporate equivalent of a time-out or a "think about
what you did wrong and what the consequences were to others besides
yourself".


Rob

"Baz" <bazz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46ab17cc$0$15226$fa0fcedb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I don't disagree with anything you say. Both technologies have their
advantages and disadvantages.

The biggest problem with ADP's is Microsoft's attitude. They seem to have
decided to drop them like a hot potato, which means that we're unlikely to
get fixes for the many bugs, let alone new features. What's more, they
will
probably do a VB6 on it in some future version of Access i.e. kill it off
completely and ignore the howls of anguish from those of us with a big
investment in the technology.

"Robert Morley" <rmorley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uBtu9GH0HHA.484@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Like you, I prefer designing in SQL EM, but I prefer working with ADPs
for
one simple reason (which I admit may be more specific to this project
than
some other types of projects): we have a lot of ad-hoc queries in our
group. It's nice to know that if I create a new View (or Table or
anything
else, for that matter), I don't have to worry about doing anything
special
to make those queries accessible to users. You just open (or refresh)
the
ADP, and they're all there automatically.

Granted, I put a nicer front-end on the app, and refreshing an ADP when
you're not showing the main database window is a bit of a challenge, but
not
having to dynamically re-link views is a major bonus for me, and one of
the
biggest reasons that I still refuse to go back to MDB/ACCDB format, no
matter how hard MS tries to push me in the direction they somehow think
will
be better for me, even though they know nothing about my environment.



Rob

"Baz" <bazz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46aa09ec$0$15224$fa0fcedb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yes, that is exactly the way MS is pushing you. I can't see anything
wrong
with mdb (and maybe accdb) with linked tables, I've done lots of
applications like this and also lots of ADP's, I don't find a great
deal
between them.

Personally I don't like the database design features of ADP's. I much
prefer Enterprise Manager, and I always have it open on another screen
while
I'm working on an ADP.

"Reese Watt" <reese@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:u6p4%232F0HHA.5772@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Baz,

Thanks for the response. It feels like I would be going backwards to
revert
to mdb's & ODBC, but I guess that is the way Microsoft is pushing me
if
I
don't want to go to .Net.

Regarding linked SQL tables inside an mdb, I understand there is no
way
to
edit the structure of those SQL tables. I really like the fact that
in
an
ADP, I have the ability to edit the structure of views, queries,
stored
procedures, tables, etc. without having to open another application.

Does Access 2007 and/or SQL 2005 give me any better tools for editing
those
SQL objects than what I find in the Enterprise Manager for SQL 2000?

Thanks,

Reese




"Baz" <bazz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46a9afaa$0$31714$db0fefd9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ADP's are as good as dead. While they are still supported by Access
2007,
it's clear that Microsoft has lost interest and has no intention of
developing the technology further.

However, there's nothing wrong with using mdb's (or accdb's) with
linked
SQL
Server tables. It's a technology that worked well for years before
ADP's
were invented.

The learning curve for VB.Net is steep, especially if Access is the
only
technology with which you have prior experience. Even if you become
an
expert you will still lack much of the Access functionality that you
know
and love (e.g. subforms, continuous forms), and it will still take
you
much
longer to develop a database application than with Access (despite
what
some
one-eyed dotnet-heads might claim).

"Reese Watt" <reese@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:us4bRD8zHHA.1212@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Here's a brief summary of my career:

I started out as an actuary using Excel spreadsheets.
I realized Excel wasn't a database, so I learned Access and VBA
I learned Access had limits, so I learned SQL-Server and ADP
projects.
I became a developer and developed a really nice application using
SQL-Server/ADP that is helping lots of people be much more
efficient.
Now, we're consider marketing this application to other firms and I
want
to
be sure I have a platform that will be good for the long-term
investment
of
future clients.

From what I'm reading, I feel like a cartoon character with my left
foot
in
one car and my right foot in another and straight ahead is a fork
in
the
road. The left fork is the VB.Net/SQL-Server road. The right fork
is
the
Access/ACCDB road. I want to continue to use Access for the front
end
and
SQL Server for the back end, but it may not be possible.

Here are my questions:

1) Is my perception correct, that Microsoft really doesn't have an
all-in-one application to design front-ends to SQL Server, other
than
the
ADP route? I know there is VB.Net, but even there you need Crystal
Reports
to design your reports.

2) Are there things that I do in Access reports that can't be done
in
Crystal Reports?

3) Is VB.Net really as slow to develop as it seems to me? I taught
myself
Access, VBA and SQL-Server, so I have a fairly good idea of the
pain
that
is
required to learn a new technology. I've also done a few projects
using
VB.Net. It just doesn't seem like VB.Net is nearly as easy to use.
Here
are a few examples:
There is no AfterUpdate event, nor a host of other easy-to-use
events.
It seems like combo boxes are much more complicated.
Data*** forms (datagrid) are much more difficult to work with.

In other words, if I bite the bullet and take six months to
really
learn
VB.Net, will I even then be able to develop applications as fast I
can
in
Access right now?

5) Are there any third-party interfaces that make VB.Net more of a
RAD
environment?

6) Is there any way for me to get in contact with a knowledgable
person
at
Microsoft to a) express my support for ADP's and b) get a better
idea
of
what the future may hold?

Thanks to all















.

Loading