Access skills - HOT or NOT??

[madrav72]

Hi All,

I am slightly concerened that people seem to think that developing access solutions using access seem to be something of a joke job compared to doing something say of something of the sql server/oracle flavours - obviously this depends on what is needed etc but I often wonder whether its worth keep my access skills fresh and up to date. I always find that wherever i work there is a dear need to work smartly make customised tools which is where access, vba, and excel really tend to shine - but i also wonder what they are worth in the IT industry.

Any comments regarding the above would be greatly appreciated.

 

[KenHigg]

I think that unless something drastic changes, Access type solutions will be around for a long time...

I've been doing them since dBase days

 

[seth_belgium]

I too notice that low esteem of access in my collegues, but when they need a quick and good sollution, guess who they come to...

Keep freshening up those skills, madrav72! One day we will be recognized for the geniusses we are.

 

[DALIEN51]

Microsoft Access The Poor Mans Database?

You’re absolutely spot on to raise this as an issue as I totally agree. Having been a professional Microsoft Access developer for 10+ years now I am finding dedicated Access work harder and harder to come by. Every one now wants their system written in SQL or their current Access application migrating to SQL!

Yes it is true increasingly in the work place Access databases are seen as "simplistic" , "old technology", "built by simple end users not 'proper' developers'", "a joke technology", "only useful for dealing with simple tasks","only useful for dealing with small data sets".

Part of the reason I believe lies in the fact that Access is part of the Microsoft Office family which includes commonly recognisable titles like Word, Excel, Power Point etc... any tom dick or harry in most work places is half competent enough to produce something useful with these products and so if Access is part of that same group the logic follows that those same simple users should be able to do the same with Microsoft Access! I think it would be viewed differently if it was a separate stand alone product only.

This attitude towards Access has been highlighted to me by companies sending simple end users on one day Access intro courses expecting them to return being able to build complex applications and so do away with the need to employ a professional Access developer....ie ME!!!!

The reason SQL is seen as superior technology is that SQL is less obtainable (end users in the main have never heard of it and of the ones who have they don’t know anything about it!) and therefore on face value harder to master or requires a superior IT professional to master it.

So yes increasingly Access is the poor mans database, an embarrassment to many an IT department that they even have any business critical applications written in it (although the main reason is it is the best solution on the market to deal with the problem its dealing with that’s why there still using it...get the point?). I'm afraid this SQL is better than Access logic is too deeply engrained to turn back the tide. Lets face it if you can't beat em join em......so if you don’t mind I’m off to get my SQL Server DBA certification bye!

Dalien51

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Lol...................

 

[madrav72]

just out of interest what would you guys consider to be the market rate for a vba/access/excel developer - i guess this differs amongst the envronment e.g. finance based roles get more but i am interested to know what the current average levels are

thanks again

 

[JPritch]

Access is seen as the red-headed DB stepchild here at my job.

Bring it up to an IT rep, and they chuckle because they think it is a joke. The IT dept is no longer supporting Access here anymore.

But surprise surprise...every month or so, guess what there is a pressing need to develop because IT doesn't have or want to commit the resources to develop a SQL Server or Oracle Solution...an Access database!!!

Then that is where I step in...

 

[KenHigg]

Any IT person who publicly denounces Access and does not see Access as an exceptional intermediate level business solution when done correctly has suspect IT skills to begin with... IMHO

I would guess their exposure to Access has been in having to deal with a Mike375 level Access Db, which may explain their perspective... Go figure...

 

[alastair69]

What has Mike375 do at you ken, or were your just using an example.

Alastair

 

[Kodo]

I think it's another tool like anything else. If you have the time to bulid a windows app and the requirements are scalability and speed, then I would do that over using Access; However, access has it's place as light-weight / portable db and that's where it's usefulness really comes in to play. I can still build a windows app off that access db and also have forms in the access db.

Be aware, though, that .NET has taken up A LOT of slack in rapid development and I can build a similar windows app in roughly the same time frame ( all specs considered).

 

[alastair69]

Kodo,

Is .Net the new version of V.B.

 

[KenHigg]

What has Mike375 do at you ken, or were your just using an example.

Alastair

It's a long story... Basically Mike had a db that he was having problems with. So he came here looking for advice. But he refused the advice offered that he basically needed to normalize his db. One of the basic problems was that every time he would say, add a new month of information, he would create a new table for that month. And it just kept on and on with things like that.

In the end he ended up alienating everyone here and left...

 

[Len Boorman]

I think there is a great deal of ignorance regarding Database Management Systems.

There is Access, SQL, Oracle and a whole bunck more.

In my opinion the only real diffecence between them apart from cost it the handling of concurrent users.

Okay Access struggles in this dept but what in terms of functionality can you not do in Access that you can do in all the others.

Forget the concurrent user bit and also max size of database, think about the actual functionality in terms of queries, forms, reports, etc. Data manipulation, and the like.

Think you will struggle to find fundamental differences.

Now the problem is that people that do not understand such matters believe that there are things you can do on SQL, Oracle etc that you cannot do with Access.

I have yet to find something that Access cannot do (functionally) that others can. I may struggle to do it but that is the learning process.

Where I work I have a similar problem. Some people do not understand the relational database thing at all and therefore think it of no use. Others are simply amazed at what can be done

Len

 

[Kodo]

Kodo,

Is .Net the new version of V.B.

Not quite. There IS a VB language for .NET though. .NET is Microsofts newest push in the rapid development area. .NET is a framework that is used to develop software for both the desktop and web alike. I can write a class for the desktop and use that same class in a website (with nearly no modifications save web specific changes) and it will do the same job. I can use the SAME IDE to develop web and DT apps.
check out www.asp.net for more info as I am not doing the explanation any justice.

 

[Kodo]

I think there is a great deal of ignorance regarding Database Management Systems.

There is Access, SQL, Oracle and a whole bunck more.

In my opinion the only real diffecence between them apart from cost it the handling of concurrent users.

Okay Access struggles in this dept but what in terms of functionality can you not do in Access that you can do in all the others.

Forget the concurrent user bit and also max size of database, think about the actual functionality in terms of queries, forms, reports, etc. Data manipulation, and the like.

Think you will struggle to find fundamental differences.

Now the problem is that people that do not understand such matters believe that there are things you can do on SQL, Oracle etc that you cannot do with Access.

I have yet to find something that Access cannot do (functionally) that others can. I may struggle to do it but that is the learning process.

Where I work I have a similar problem. Some people do not understand the relational database thing at all and therefore think it of no use. Others are simply amazed at what can be done

Len

I can't use an Access db for 1000 users on the web. I can't use triggers and to the best of my knowlege, Stored Procedure support is limited. I'm talking about a straight up Access DB, not an access PROJECT that ties to a SQL database. If I need to build an app that needs to be used in many different offices that are seperated geographically, I'm sure as hell not using Access for this. There is a reason it's called an OFFICE product. .02

 

[KenHigg]

...
Think you will struggle to find fundamental differences.
...
Len

IMHO - Here is the biggest fundamental difference: Link

 

[Len Boorman]

Kodo. You have helped me a number of times particularly with the asp.net bits and therefore I do respect your knowledge but I think that like every application it should be reviewed in the correct situation.

I can't use an Access db for 1000 users on the web.

Agreed

I can't use triggers and to the best of my knowlege,

What about using Form Properties as triggers, maybe not exactly the same but close perhaps.

Stored Procedure support is limited.

Could be, My experience limited in this area

The fact that it is by Bill Gates does put a lot of people off but like most things it has its limitations and the art is to use the right tool at the right time. Lots of stuff can be handled by Access which is cheaper, faster to build and implement, easier to maintain and an ideal development tool.

My opinion

Len

 

[KenHigg]

So it seems with all the brain power around here, we should be able to develop a somewhat comprehensive checklist as to when and not to use Access. In fact, I'd like to submit such a check list to my boss(s). How about this for starters:

Consider Access When:
1. You need to deploy the FE to 5-10 users in a semi-controlled work environment.
2. You don't anticipate more than a couple hundred thousand rows in the main table(s).

Are these close? What else?

 

[Len Boorman]

So it seems with all the brain power around here, we should be able to develop a somewhat comprehensive checklist as to when and not to use Access. In fact, I'd like to submit such a check list to my boss(s). How about this for starters:

Consider Access When:
1. You need to deploy the FE to 5-10 users in a semi-controlled work environment.
2. You don't anticipate more than a couple hundred thousand rows in the main table(s).

Are these close? What else?

User requirements are only loosely defined
Process to be mapped is still being developed

I actually have an application out with 750,000 records in main table. Low users like 3. and used maybe 5 times per week. Handles serial number allocations in batches.

Len

 

[KenHigg]

User requirements are only loosely defined
Process to be mapped is still being developed

I actually have an application out with 750,000 records in main table. Low users like 3. and used maybe 5 times per week. Handles serial number allocations in batches.

Len

Hum...

So some the factors would be:
Number of users (concurrent)
Records

Would there need to be some kind of way to quantify the complexity of the relationships/tables, code, etc. Maybe 'Simple, slightly complex, complex and extremely complex'. ? Maybe these factors could be grouped together and called 'Processing Complexity'. So if the Processing Complexity were extremely high then the number of concurrent users would need to be less. ??