Microsoft Access is redundant technology and no longer supported by Microsoft (1 Viewer)

Groundrush

Registered User
Joined
Apr 14, 2002
Messages
1,376
Just read this on my works intranet site :eek:

They don't know what they are talking about :mad:

Access Databases to be deleted

Do you use an Access database? If so, read this.

From Wednesday 1 August, all Access databases that have not been used in the last twelve months will be automatically deleted by ICT. Once deleted, they cannot be retrieved.

Why are we doing this?

A recent review has shown a significant number of Access databases sitting on the council's network. This is problematic, because:

Access does not meet the levels of security or resilience we expect from its corporate applications.

A significant number of databases appear to be inactive and are taking up costly storage space.

Many are being used to control and manage valuable customer and business information.

Microsoft Access is redundant technology and no longer supported by Microsoft. Support is currently being provided by IT on an informal basis to keep databases operational. However, this is not sustainable long-term.

In the longer term, ICT will be reviewing all databases that are in current/active use, and will work with 'owners' to begin moving data over to corporate applications that are fully supported and secure.

Wednesday 6 June 2012
 

Lightwave

Ad astra
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,428
There has been a gradual outsourcing of IT department staff and with it a general increase in the perception that all staff should in no way design any kind of applications in public organisations.

Sad really they haven't got the confidence to allow individuals to take responsibility for their own work.

What a load of b****

Chances are they won't be able to implement it as they will be inundated with applications that they will need to support and quickly realise that it can't be done.

You might want to point out to them that they are factually incorrect in access not being supported and that storage has been steadily getting cheaper.
 

Groundrush

Registered User
Joined
Apr 14, 2002
Messages
1,376
My database is used everyday as our main system
It was supposed to only be a temporary solution until the £250,000 corporate system did what we needed it to do. That was back in 2007.
 

Lightwave

Ad astra
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,428
Groundrush you probably don't have anything to worry about.

Just keep backups of the your system design off site so they can't wipe out your valuable code while your not looking (you can keep all the data on servers within the organisation)

You could also ask for the facilty to a Test SQL Environment any security issues they can possibly dream up can be solved by using SQL Server as a back end.

PS if you hold the information in SQL Server / Access / Oracle or anything else chances are the size will be very similar.

Quite a lot of data in public organisations is publicly available on request anyway which is another thing you might want to point out. And the fact that I don't think there's ever been a criminal case of data loss from authorities ever?

Whereas there have been plenty of cases of poor system implementation / negligent financial management and general poor coporate management. (the route of these things are nearly always poor process design)
 

Vassago

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
4,396
We've been doing the same. We have a project management team currently looking into a list of all Access databases used in the company. They are creating new applications to replace all existing Access databases and we are going to store all data in SQL Server instead. While I'll point out it's a good idea because of processing lift and better reporting system than Access IMO, I don't think they knew what they were getting themselves into with all of the Access stuff I and many of my colleagues have created that are designed as full work systems for some of our departments. This is only because when it was designed, we were denied the right to use SQL Server. NOW, it's my job to help import the tables into SQL Server as a DBA. Go figure, right?
 

pbaldy

Wino Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 30, 2003
Messages
33,651
The Access team within Microsoft working diligently on the next version will be surprised to hear that they are no longer supported. :p
 

Lightwave

Ad astra
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,428
We've been doing the same. We have a project management team currently looking into a list of all Access databases used in the company. They are creating new applications to replace all existing Access databases and we are going to store all data in SQL Server instead. While I'll point out it's a good idea because of processing lift and better reporting system than Access IMO, I don't think they knew what they were getting themselves into with all of the Access stuff I and many of my colleagues have created that are designed as full work systems for some of our departments. This is only because when it was designed, we were denied the right to use SQL Server. NOW, it's my job to help import the tables into SQL Server as a DBA. Go figure, right?
Vassago well done on helping them out and should certainly get them up to speed with application development but I'm curious.

How are they getting on with the jobs and how many systems are they trying to create? Will they support and continue development after initial transfer?
 

Vassago

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
4,396
Vassago well done on helping them out and should certainly get them up to speed with application development but I'm curious.

How are they getting on with the jobs and how many systems are they trying to create? Will they support and continue development after initial transfer?
Therein lies the issue. They are realizing the number of systems that will need to be converted. Already, my work is becoming increasingly overwhelming on the DBA side alone. For the programmers, I can only imagine how overwhelming things will be.
 

oumahexi

Free Range Witch
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
1,998
Groundrush you probably don't have anything to worry about.

Just keep backups of the your system design off site so they can't wipe out your valuable code while your not looking (you can keep all the data
on servers within the organisation)
Noooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek: You cannot do that with government databases, you will be in huuuuuuuuugggggeeee doo doo!!!
 

Lightwave

Ad astra
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,428
Just to explain what I was meaning.

Absolutely don't take the data out of the organisation as you could open yourself up to criticism / disciplinary proceedings.

But an empty database on which you are working is no problem. This can be useful to work on at home.
 

Rx_

Nothing In Moderation
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
2,803
In the old days, an IT department had to create a business case to evaluate the features, commit to the requirements, and justify the total cost of ownership (TCO). The TCO included the actual users time and efficiency. The application and data had a line-item value as an asset in the company.

Now thanks a generation that beleives Nike is a business plan (i.e "just do it"), we have a one-size-fits-all mentality.

When a company has no booked value on its assets. That company is not looking out for the stockholders investment. If the application and data have no value, any other worthless decision will work. Accountablilty is missing from the decision making process.

This also brings up an interesting question: If the organization has zero line-item value on something and plans to recycle it; what is the acutal financial damage of taking it home?

Disclaimer: I do not suggest taking anything! It is just an interesting question.
 

Lightwave

Ad astra
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,428
Public organisations would do well to concentrate on the job at hand rather than worrying about dark misgivings that probably will never come to light.
 

oumahexi

Free Range Witch
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
1,998
Public organisations would do well to concentrate on the job at hand rather than worrying about dark misgivings that probably will never come to light.
Ha ha ha, you wouldn't want them to do anything that might lead them down the path of making a decision rather than being distracted by what other people might be up to surely :rolleyes: :)

I do agree Lightwave.
 

VilaRestal

';drop database master;--
Joined
Jun 8, 2011
Messages
1,046
I love the contradiction between these two lines:

"A significant number of databases appear to be inactive and are taking up costly storage space."

"Many are being used to control and manage valuable customer and business information."

and I assume when they say "Microsoft Access is redundant technology and no longer supported by Microsoft" they mean we are no longer getting support from Microsoft for Access.

Will they be banning the creation of further Access databases (will it be a prohibited application)? What about Excel? Plenty of 'databases' get made in that. And once they've got rid of those two then people will start storing data in Word. Then they'll see how efficient and secure that is.

And how tight on storage space are they that they even consider looking at those few little mdbs as a target for freeing up space?

1TB SCSI HDD costs about £100. £1 per GB. If they sacked the dimwit that decided this they could save enough money to buy thousands of TBs of space.
 
Last edited:

Thales750

Formerly Jsanders
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
1,681
I love the contradiction between these two lines:


1TB SCSI HDD costs about £100. £1 per GB. If they sacked the dimwit that decided this they could save enough money to buy thousands of TBs of space.
Actually .1
in the US about $50 per TB
 

VilaRestal

';drop database master;--
Joined
Jun 8, 2011
Messages
1,046
Actually .1
oops, I mean err, yes, I knew that, I mean, err, I meant that :eek:

I stand by the dimwit remark about the person making this decision (and coming from me that's saying a lot - it's a good job I don't work in accounts).
 

SDB

Registered User
Joined
Sep 16, 2004
Messages
39
sounds just like HMV..unless its excel it ain't worth looking at :)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom