Solved Resurrecting old threads? (1 Viewer)

[NauticalGent]

borderline inactive, or borderline barely alive?

Yes...?

 

[BlueSpruce]

borderline inactive, or borderline barely alive?

The sad part is I don't see any new developers learning Access, so we will fade away via attrition. Perhaps Access app users, or AI, will step up to the plate and learn how to maintain their apps when the developer is no longer available?

 

[Mike Krailo]

Most newer folks probably don't key in on the dates of the threads and view them as if they are in the here and now by accident. I know I made that mistake, but after you have done it a time or two, you just know that you shouldn't be doing it, so you stop doing it.

Then there is the person who really does want to revive an older thread knowingly and they don't feel bad about it at all. After all, there really is no rule on it except for the unspoken or chided version of being shamed for it. In the grand scheme of things, it does no real harm. Certainly nothing that will affect any of us longer than the 5 minutes it takes us to consider how annoyed we just got based on a revived thread. I won't lose sleep over it for sure. I don't think it's worth spending anymore time thinking about it. But if this thread gets revived five years from now, it might get a laugh.

 

[AccessBlaster]

The sad part is I don't see any new developers learning Access, so we will fade away via attrition. Perhaps Access app users, or AI, will step up to the plate and learn how to maintain their apps when the developer is no longer available?

I disagree. AI won't hurt seasoned developers any more than MZ-Tools or similar utilities. You still need to understand the basics.
It's like putting two drivers in race cars, one a professional and the other a novice. The outcome will be vastly different.

 

[BlueSpruce]

I disagree. AI won't hurt seasoned developers any more than MZ-Tools or similar utilities. You still need to understand the basics.
It's like putting two drivers in race cars, one a professional and the other a novice. The outcome will be vastly different.

I'm not saying AI will hurt developers, I'm saying Access users will use AI to maintain their apps if the developer is no longer available, or if stakeholders no longer want to hire developers. Meantime, users will gain experience supporting their apps. How many experienced Access developers do you know who started out as Access users?

 

[Isaac]

AI won't hurt seasoned developers any more than MZ-Tools or similar utilities. You still need to understand the basics.
It's like putting two drivers in race cars, one a professional and the other a novice. The outcome will be vastly different.

I agree in the sense that I think you are literally correct , in "you still need to understand the basics".
Whether or not management of companies will comprehend and buy into that or whether they'll try to force vibe coding as they drool with excitement at the thought of the money they'd save from a layoff
But in the end, the truth must be vindicated by people's experience, as solely vibe coding for production assets will have enough catastrophic consequences that finally the Security department will say "Enough - you must have real programmers on staff to be safe"

 

[BlueSpruce]

I agree in the sense that I think you are literally correct , in "you still need to understand the basics".
Whether or not management of companies will comprehend and buy into that or whether they'll try to force vibe coding as they drool with excitement at the thought of the money they'd save from a layoff
But in the end, the truth must be vindicated by people's experience, as solely vibe coding for production assets will have enough catastrophic consequences that finally the Security department will say "Enough - you must have real programmers on staff to be safe"

Time will tell. In the meantime, Stakeholders are embracing AI as a magician who can do it all and save lots of money. If this big experiment goes sideways, then they will hire humans as needed to fix the problems.

 

[Isaac]

If this big experiment goes sideways, then they will hire humans as needed to fix the problems.

It will only take some data breaches/hacks to open their eyes that a PM armed with vibe coding tools is not enough.

 

[BlueSpruce]

Then there is the person who really does want to revive an older thread knowingly and they don't feel bad about it at all. After all, there really is no rule on it except for the unspoken or chided version of being shamed for it. In the grand scheme of things, it does no real harm. Certainly nothing that will affect any of us longer than the 5 minutes it takes us to consider how annoyed we just got based on a revived thread. I won't lose sleep over it for sure. I don't think it's worth spending anymore time thinking about it. But if this thread gets revived five years from now, it might get a laugh.

We had an issue with Citrix so I searched for threads with Citrix and Access in them. A 2003 thread caught my attention and I posted in that thread.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The reason we don't lock old threads is because sometimes the problem comes up again and a new round of developers need to ask questions. Some of us have been around long enough to maybe remember a little about the answer.

 

[amorosik]

From my point of view, there's no reason to set a time limit for responses
In fact, there's a specific reason to allow responses even much later, and that's the fact that, being a technical forum, keeping the initial question and all the answers within the same 3d is certainly useful for maintaining order and facilitating the search for information on a specific problem.

 

[Isaac]

The reason we don't lock old threads is because sometimes the problem comes up again and a new round of developers need to ask questions. Some of us have been around long enough to maybe remember a little about the answer.

I agree and something valuable can ALWAYS be added to ANY conversation. That's also (one of the many) good reason not to have a 'solved' tag, IMHO. I loved the UA threads that would go on and on with stuff not directly related to the original question, I learned the most from this

 

[Gasman]

I agree and something valuable can ALWAYS be added to ANY conversation. That's also (one of the many) good reason not to have a 'solved' tag, IMHO. I loved the UA threads that would go on and on with stuff not directly related to the original question, I learned the most from this

Yes, hard to find the wood amongst the trees.
Also Solved allows you to pinpoint that thread and see how it was solved?

 

[Gasman]

The reason we don't lock old threads is because sometimes the problem comes up again and a new round of developers need to ask questions. Some of us have been around long enough to maybe remember a little about the answer.

A link to the original thread, does not go amiss?