Future of Access (2 Viewers)

I have a cousin who plans to move to Apple and alternatives to MS Office over this one.
From what I understand, Apple kicks the crap out of Windows when it come to desktop publishing anyway...
 
From what I understand, Apple kicks the crap out of Windows when it come to desktop publishing anyway...
It probably does, but it's the principle of the thing that she complains about.
 
I could be wrong but I think the only device based db RAD tool that works on iOS is Filemaker.

As an individual you do have a choice, but the corporate world (with perhaps the exception of those who are into publishing/design/etc) choose windows because of the cost of equipment - iOS devices are around twice the cost of a windows equivalent.

One day, I expect everything will be on the web and devices merely dumb terminals - effectively back to the old main/mini computer era but without wires and no doubt less secure.
 
I could be wrong but I think the only device based db RAD tool that works on iOS is Filemaker.
There's also Realm, which I've never heard of before, and Firebase, but I don't think they're RAD like FileMaker.
As an individual you do have a choice, but the corporate world (with perhaps the exception of those who are into publishing/design/etc) choose windows because of the cost of equipment - iOS devices are around twice the cost of a windows equivalent.

One day, I expect everything will be on the web and devices merely dumb terminals - effectively back to the old main/mini computer era but without wires and no doubt less secure.
Agreed. In the corporate world I am seeing many thin client workstations replacing desktops, and the consumer world is also heading in that direction. I wouldn't be surprised if the next major release of Windows and Office are SaaS Online versions and desktop perpetual versions are no more. A move like that would leave desktop Access out of the future, unless MS provides a viable online replacement. And I don't think PowerApps is it. AWA was actually a viable replacement, and by now would've been robust had MS not retired it.
 
Last edited:
No doubt, they did.
If they would do the same for Excel and Word, you can expect this to be multiplied by 1000.
And keep in mind: The transition to "New Outlook" is nowhere near completion. Most organizations depending on Outlook automation won't have switched to New Outlook yet.
There were many more Excel and Word apps automating Outlook, e.g. mailing lists with mail merge, that also stopped working!
 
Last edited:
There's also Realm, which I've never heard of before, and Firebase, but I don't think they're RAD like FileMaker.

Agreed. In the corporate world I am seeing more thin client workstations replacing desktops, and the consumer world is quickly heading in that direction. I wouldn't be surprised if the next major release of Windows and Office are SaaS Online versions and desktop perpetual versions are no more. A move like that would leave desktop Access out of the future, unless MS provides a viable online replacement. And I don't think PowerApps is it. AWA was actually a viable replacement, and by now would've been robust had MS not retired it.
PowerApps is currently more flexible and extensible than AWA's ever were. Granted that doesn't make them a viable replacement for AWA's either, but AWA's were doomed from the beginning by the box they were put in to begin with. The train went from Station A to Station B and stopped there. PowerApps has the Power Platform ecosystem behind it including the ability to consume Public APIs and connectors to over 300 different data sources, not just SQL Azure, as was the case for AWAs.

It's interesting to speculate what AWA's could have evolved into, perhaps something more like PowerApps already is, though? 😉

One thing that tickles me is that PA was originally touted as a "low-code" platform. Yet over time that has evolved into "less low" coding. Today, for example, I saw a YouTube video on creating UDF's for PowerApps. They walk and quack a lot like simple VBA Functions, taking input parameters and returning output parameters OR executing actions like VBA Subs. What that tells me is that the Power Platform development team recognizes the need to push their platform beyond its early "no-code/low-code" identity.

Again, that could have happened with AWAs, of course. What did happen was a new platform was built from the ground up to be browser based from the beginning.

If it were not so costly to license, I'm convinced PowerApps would be a more popular option.
 
PowerApps is currently more flexible and extensible than AWA's ever were. Granted that doesn't make them a viable replacement for AWA's either, but AWA's were doomed from the beginning by the box they were put in to begin with. The train went from Station A to Station B and stopped there. PowerApps has the Power Platform ecosystem behind it including the ability to consume Public APIs and connectors to over 300 different data sources, not just SQL Azure, as was the case for AWAs.

It's interesting to speculate what AWA's could have evolved into, perhaps something more like PowerApps already is, though? 😉

One thing that tickles me is that PA was originally touted as a "low-code" platform. Yet over time that has evolved into "less low" coding. Today, for example, I saw a YouTube video on creating UDF's for PowerApps. They walk and quack a lot like simple VBA Functions, taking input parameters and returning output parameters OR executing actions like VBA Subs. What that tells me is that the Power Platform development team recognizes the need to push their platform beyond its early "no-code/low-code" identity.

Again, that could have happened with AWAs, of course. What did happen was a new platform was built from the ground up to be browser based from the beginning.

If it were not so costly to license, I'm convinced PowerApps would be a more popular option.
AWA was in the Office Online box, along with Excel, Word, Outlook, and for only being around for a couple of years I saw some really neat demos, like Julian Kirkness' KasPer Pro HR app. It also had anonymous public facing capability and was bundled in a very affordable O365 plan. Unfortunately, it only gained traction with a handful of Access developers because it didn't have a vba language. AWA was web based and you cannot use COM based vba, bound objects, and manipulate Windows Filesystems with stateless unbound web applications. Many desktop Access developers failed to understand and accept that concept.
 
Last edited:
Many years ago, partly in jest, I suggested that in place of a license key, users could only install Access if they passed a 10 question quiz on Database Normalization.
And I'd like members of Congress to pass a test on the Constitution;) I think we'll both be disappointed.
 
Back in the day I thought Filemaker was a bit noddy when compared to Access.
Looked promising but generally disappointed as a viable solution.
Maybe it has improved?
 
Back in the day I thought Filemaker was a bit noddy when compared to Access.
Looked promising but generally disappointed as a viable solution.
Maybe it has improved?
The last time I looked at FM, about 5 years ago, it didn't have an SQL DML, was expensive, $100/yr each user, required special hosting if using as a website, the server is $800/yr, development is mostly drag/drop oriented.
 
Back in my first semester of grad school, one of my professors gave me a copy of Access and asked me to load it on my computer and see if I could take some data he had in spreadsheets, import the data into Access, manipulate and report on the data. It's very hard for me to grasp the reality of that being 33 years ago and that I've been working with Access (either FT or PT) ever since. I've been hearing of Access' demise for almost that entire 33 years too (ha-ha). Microsoft can do whatever it wants with Access - but it would be very difficult for Microsoft to ignore the fact that the number of applications developed in Access over the course of 33 years is probably deep in the millions - with some portion of those still in use - and a significant portion of those in use considered mission critical by the organizations using them.
 
Microsoft can and will do as they damned well please. However, there is a certain imprimatur to having a database product as part of Office. What usually happens with the other big companies is that at some point they have a product that they feel is dragging them down, so they spin it off to be on its own or as part of a limited subsidiary. If some day we hear that Access is going its separate way from the rest of office, I would be sad but not at all surprised. On the other hand, if Microdumb doesn't allow for a cadre of rogue software engineers to take over the spin-off, I would be terribly surprised.
 
Microsoft can and will do as they damned well please. However, there is a certain imprimatur to having a database product as part of Office. What usually happens with the other big companies is that at some point they have a product that they feel is dragging them down, so they spin it off to be on its own or as part of a limited subsidiary. If some day we hear that Access is going its separate way from the rest of office, I would be sad but not at all surprised. On the other hand, if Microdumb doesn't allow for a cadre of rogue software engineers to take over the spin-off, I would be terribly surprised.
I don't think Access will breakaway from Office because vba is the glue that holds all the Office tools together. However, if MS decides to deprecate vba and just go with Online Office, which currently includes Excel, Word, and Outlook, then Desktop Access will be on its own.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Access will breakaway from Office because vba is the glue that holds all the Office tools together. However, if MS decides to deprecate vba and just go with Online Office, which currently includes Excel, Word, and Outlook, then Desktop Access will be on its own.

Excel/Outlook = actively invested, future-proofed.
PowerApps/Dataverse = where Microsoft wants people to go next.
Access = maintained, but sidelined.
1755356913664.png
 
Excel/Outlook = actively invested, future-proofed.
PowerApps/Dataverse = where Microsoft wants people to go next.
Access = maintained, but sidelined.
MS may want Access users to migrate to PA, but if PA cannot fulfill all the needs their Access apps currently delivers, users will continue using Access, as several have been doing for decades. MS is concerned about vba being a high security risk. That's why they wanted to retire desktop Outlook.
 
Clipchamp probably gets more advertising dollars than Access, just sayin.
How many years ago did you last see MS mention Access when promoting Office/M365?.. I remember seeing brief blurbs about Access in Office Professional 2010.
 
How many years ago did you last see MS mention Access when promoting Office/M365?.. I remember seeing brief blurbs about Access in Office Professional 2010.
This breaks my heart. But it tells me that the Access team has no juice or fails to use what they have to get a mention. Also, and most importantly, the SQL Server team thinks of Access as a competitor because they don't even know what Access is and they think of it only in terms of Jet/ACE. So they don't even understand that many production Access applications rely on SQL Server or other RDBMS as their data store. Most of the "Access is dead" rumors actually originate with the SQL Server team.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom