Re: convincing a client to go with dotNet instead of Access project

I've had this "fight" before and lost. :< Fortunately for the client the
apps life was only supposed to be six to twelve months long. Unfortunately
for the client, we ended up creating a release a week in the last phases of
development. :<<<< Deployment out to regional office was a NIGHTMARE! We
didn't have probs with synchronization cause we used Access for the forms
creation/execution only. We were using Access to access a central SQL
Server. However, like you mentioned, I believe using something VB in my
case (or C# in your case today :>) is the better way to go. BUT, possibly
your biggest hurdle will be the front end is already developed in Access. :<
That is hard to compete against.

Cons to using C#
-new paradigm, language, IDE, manager are always afraid of change
-learning curve for language, APIs, deployment management, etc
-hey Access is better than using java/swing to do it!
-hey if the UI is in Acces why change? that's a tough one you probably
can't argue against, MS afterall isn't going to rewrite MS Office in C# from
C++ over night

Pros to using C#
-huge integration with SQL Server
-MUCH better form design support in VS than in Access (IMHO that is)
-better multi-user architecture in WinForms than in Access
-better control over version control, source control, setup programs
-opportunity to easily document code (UML, documentation from code comments)
-opportunity to extend the "reach" of the application with giving it a web
front end later on, maybe webservices, RSS, etc
-Access really tops out with performance after six concurrent connections
(does your manager know that?)
-better support for code/development help with C# than with Access (ok,
that's a bit of exaggeration, but I'm biased :>)
-with .NET you can use Crystal Reports, which is MUCH superiour to Access
for reports (if that is truely a main concern for management)

Having said all this, you might be fighting a losing battle. Good luck to
you, but you might have better luck with a future project than with this
one. But that's cool, you're setting the framework with management about
the pros/cons of .NET. Also be careful when you compare .NET to Access.
Access is the DB, and also the development and runtime environment. .NET is
the framework, VB.NET and C# are the languages you code in, and VS2k3 is the
development environment (which I'm sure you already know that :>). I see
unfair comparisons with java to .NET, that's like apples and oranges, .NET
to J2EE is the fair comparison, like C# is to java, or WinForms to Swing.

Good luck with this! :>


"bill" <belgie@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Oy$i5WCTFHA.3840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>I am trying to convince a client that dotNet is preferable to an Access
> project (ADP/ADE).
>
> This client currently has a large, pure Access MDB solution with 30+
> users,
> which needs to be upgraded.
>
> I believe a dotNet solution is better, but I'm trying to be as convincing
> as
> possible -- and maybe I'm wrong!
>
> I would appreciate any input or references which could help me.
>
> My reasons for going with a dotNet solution are:
> - The multi-tier environment is more desirable because it is easier to
> deploy updates, such as a centralized web service, or as web forms
> - The ADP is less efficient because it requires a continuous connection
> to the backend database, whereas ADO.NET is disconnected
> - I can use object oriented techniques, such as inheritance
> - A dotNet solution requires less bandwidth (some users will be
> accessing
> the database over a VPN pipe)
> - Code can be re-used more easily
>
> The ADP promoter cites the following arguments:
>
> - Access has better reporting capabilities
> - Access is quicker to develop in
> - The ADP is just as efficient as a dotNet solution in terms of data
> access
> - The front end is already built in Access
>
> Thanks!
> Bill
>
>


.

Relevant Pages
Loading