Future of Access (2 Viewers)

[BlueSpruce]

Hello Everyone,

I had recently joined the UtterAccess forum, but unfortunately that site was permanently shutdown without any advance warning. I am a team member of four Access developers and we are concerned about the stability and future of Access.

 

[Jon]

Welcome to Access World! We're so happy to have you join us as a member of our community. As the most active Microsoft Access discussion forum on the internet, with posts dating back more than 20 years, we have a wealth of knowledge and experience to share with you.

We're a friendly and helpful community, so don't hesitate to ask any questions you have or share your own experiences with Access. We're here to support you and help you get the most out of this powerful database program.

To get started, we recommend reading the post linked below. It contains important information for all new users of the forum:

https://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/threads/new-member-read-me-first.223250/

We hope you have a great time participating in the discussion and learning from other Access enthusiasts. We look forward to having you around!

 

[theDBguy]

Hi. Welcome to AWF!

 

[Pat Hartman]

Bruce, Access has been around since the early 90's. It's had a long run as a development platform and there is still nothing better for desktop development. One never knows what MS will do in the future but without a viable replacement, MS will probably not stop development any time soon. You should have a few years advance notice if/when development will stop and then a few years after that before support stops. So, there is nothing imminent.

 

[NauticalGent]

Welcome aboard!

UA's demise and the future of Access have nothing to do with each other.

 

[BlueSpruce]

One never knows what MS will do in the future but without a viable replacement, MS will probably not stop development any time soon.

I think MS will never retire Access because many government agencies and private enterprises have Access applications running for several decades, and the time and cost to convert them to web applications is significant.

 

[NauticalGent]

I think MS will never retire Access because many government agencies and private enterprises have Access applications running for several decades, and the time and cost to convert them to web applications is significant.

All good points, I would add that there is simply no single source replacement, and since just about EVERY work station on the government workstations already HAVE Access, the decision is really a no-brainer.

 

[BlueSpruce]

We are also concerned that for security purposes, Microsoft will restrict VBA from being able to manipulate the Windows Filesystem, e.g. FSO, Shell Commands, Automation, etc. Web Applications are stateless with no binding. That was main reason for Classic Outlook being replaced with webmail Outlook. VBA cannot automate webmail.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Yeah, pretty much every government workstation has a copy of Access preinstalled, but hardly anyone knows what it actually is let alone how to program with it. And when it comes to IT departments, they're almost universally against because of it ability to run automated.

 

[NauticalGent]

they're almost universally against because of it ability to run automated.

As are ALL Office products, but what do we know??

 

[AccessBlaster]

As are ALL Office products, but what do we know??

The member of the suite they fear most is the one they understand least.

 

[BlueSpruce]

pretty much every government workstation has a copy of Access preinstalled, but hardly anyone knows what it actually is let alone how to program with it. And when it comes to IT departments, they're almost universally against because of it ability to run automated.

Despite the lack of familiarity with Access, and IT's not liking it, I know for a fact that several State an Federal agencies have thousands of departamental Access applications running since the 1990's and they have upgraded them throughout time, e.g. converting from mdb's to accdb's, streamlining and adding more functionality, etc. and IT's have no choice but to swallow that pill. About the only trend I have seen happening is the migration of data in native Access backends to MultiTenant db servers, like SQL Server so IT can have centralized control of all the data.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Every so often we hear the "Access is going away" comments, then they die down as a new version of Office gets released and Access is still available. There will probably be some limitations on new features in Access, because if MS does TOO MUCH to make it nicer, it will start to compete with SQL Lite.

 

[Pat Hartman]

There will probably be some limitations on new features in Access, because if MS does TOO MUCH to make it nicer, it will start to compete with SQL Lite.

That is exactly the problem the SQL Server people see and why they perpetually bad mouth Access. They think of Jet/ACE as competitors and never understand that Access is a RAD tool that builds interfaces and is NOT a database engine. Jet and ACE are database engines. I know you know that but even you equate Access the RAD tool with SQL Server.

As far as SQL Server is concerned, they should be thinking of Access the RAD tool as a complementary tool and not as a competitor. The fact that they don't tells us that MS doesn't market Access, the RAD tool correctly.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Jet and ACE are database engines. I know you know that but even you equate Access the RAD tool with SQL Server.

Only for ease of discussion. I know the difference between Access, the self-contained RAD tool and SQL Server / ORACLE / SYBASE / etc. as active SQL engines. But sometimes I will verbally compare Access and SQL Server in an isolated way. Verbal shorthand consistent with the thread under consideration.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Only for ease of discussion. I know the difference between Access, the self-contained RAD tool and SQL Server / ORACLE / SYBASE / etc. as active SQL engines. But sometimes I will verbally compare Access and SQL Server in an isolated way. Verbal shorthand consistent with the thread under consideration.

When people who actually know the difference conflate Access with a database engine, that perpetuates the confusion. And the SQL Server team will continue to pan "Access" to corporate America because they have no clue what it actually is. And the people new to Access will never understand that the criticism of "Access" which they see everywhere is almost always talking about Jet and ACE.

 

[AccessBlaster]

It’s weird because I never hear this kind of criticism with other similar products. There’s always this cloud hanging over Access sometimes it’s the community, other times it’s the perceived lack of interest from the Microsoft Access team. It’s all very confusing.

 

[BlueSpruce]

That is exactly the problem the SQL Server people see and why they perpetually bad mouth Access. They think of Jet/ACE as competitors and never understand that Access is a RAD tool that builds interfaces and is NOT a database engine.

Back in the 1970's and 80's I used a mainframe based report writing tool named FOCUS that had the ability to link with all kinds of datasets. It also had a native datastore, but unlike Access, it was hardly ever used for storing data. I don't see Access as stepping on SQL-Server's toes. I see it as a productivity tool that integrates well with other Office components, like Excel, Word, Classic Outlook, and has the ability to connect with any db via ODBC. You can't blame non developers for building homebrew Access applications when IT departments were unable to timely fulfill their users needs, or its a small business with no IT department that has a limited budget and wants to stop using Excel to run their business. I don't see IT's bashing Excel, despite it being a bigger security risk than Access.

 

[AngelSpeaks]

Back in the 1970's and 80's I used a mainframe based report writing tool named FOCUS that had the ability to link with all kinds of datasets. It also had a native datastore, but unlike Access, it was hardly ever used for storing data. I don't see Access as stepping on SQL-Server's toes. I see it as a productivity tool that integrates well with other Office components, like Excel, Word, Classic Outlook, and has the ability to connect with any db via ODBC. You can't blame non developers for building homebrew Access applications when IT departments were unable to timely provide their needs, or its a small business with no IT department that has a limited budget and wants to stop using Excel to run their business. I don't see IT's bashing Excel, despite it being a bigger security risk than Access.

I remember FOCUS. I went to their users convention in Orlando in the early 1980s. Our IT department did a lot with it.

 

[BlueSpruce]

Does anyone remember Crystal Reports? Microsoft used to bundle it with Visual Studio 2003 and then they replaced Crystal with SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS).