• ** There has been a recent site upgrade. Please clear your browser cache to avoid issues. **
  • New forum feature - post voting and best solution

    Check out this thread for the details: https://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/threads/new-forum-feature-post-voting-and-best-answer.314134/

    This new feature looks great to me! :)

  • We now have 3 forum themes

    Go for the default (light) theme, Shades of Grey or Shades of Blue. I just added the Blue one.

    The thread about it is here: https://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/threads/new-forum-theme-shades-of-blue.314136/

The future of Access (1 Viewer)

AccessBlaster

Custom title here:
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
2,649
It is once again a central part of the MS Office strategy.
This seems curious to me, many times Microsoft doesn't even include Access in their adverts. Excel, Word and PowerPoint seem central Access feels like an after thought.
 

JohnPapa

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 19:42
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
507
This seems curious to me, many times Microsoft doesn't even include Access in their adverts. Excel, Word and PowerPoint seem central Access feels like an after thought.
This may be due to the fact that everyone uses Word, many people Excel and fewer people Access.
 

Isaac

Lifelong Learner
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,437
Access truly does occupy a unique and somewhat curious niche, the more I think about it. First you have the group solidly in the [what they would call] "database development" career. A vast majority of those are never going to consider Access, they're going to use a major RDBMS.
Then you have departments/small businesses who have never considered using databases, and many of them when they do, they're also going to contract with someone who deals in major RDBMS...Because that's the advertising they get back when they investigate the issue.
Then you have the unique crowd of us who does appreciate the role that Access can play--for Front End development, and Back End, "if nothing else is available". We are a wonderful and special crowd, if I do say so myself.
But I agree with JohnPapa, volume-wise, it's absolutely nothing like the fact that "Word Processing? Word is king".."Spreadsheets? Excel is king". Access being not like that, quite, in the db world, it's more for-those-who-have-discovered-its-value type of category. Kind of a unique role.
 

AccessBlaster

Custom title here:
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
2,649

1600271026894.png
 
  • Love
Reactions: Jon

Isaac

Lifelong Learner
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,437
Don't know how they gather that info, but interesting - thanks for posting.

I promise not to get started or say anything else about the word "Relational" on the "Microsoft Access" line! I don't want to become known as ButtonMoon-ish. MSA is very useful and I'll leave it at that..or try my best to. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Local time
Today, 17:42
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
3,674
@AccessBlaster Great table there. Really useful to see how it compares.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 13:42
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
29,759
@JohnPapa, you might want to read my entire recommendation in post #5 because it included when you should stay with A2013.

What incompatibility are you experiencing? I have apps that were created with A2007 that are running fine in the current O365 version of Access.

If your users are not also using O365, then you might need to distribute a newer version of the Runtime engine. If the problem is that you are using OLE automation of Word, Excel, Outlook, you might need to switch to late binding to support older versions of Office being used by your user community.

One of the things I am very careful about is not using features in Access that are not supported in the Access version my users have installed. I work for a lot of clients and there is no way I can maintain all their development environments so, I develop in O365 and just don't use new features unless they are a requirement for the app. And in that case, the client has to upgrade also.
 
Last edited:

JohnPapa

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 19:42
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
507

View attachment 85008

If we want to be precise Access is not a DBMS, it is a very user friendly software development environment which comes bundled at present with the ACE db. I am assuming that the very useful table above refers to ACE. Also it is definitely not Relational in the sense that SQL Server is..
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 13:42
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
29,759
A vast majority of those are never going to consider Access, they're going to use a major RDBMS.
JohnPapa beat me to it.

"Access" is NOT a RDBMS no matter how many people call it that. Jeese Louse, Even the Microsoft SQL Server people call "Access" a database and think "Access" is their competitor!!!!! rather than a complementary tool to create applications. Jet and ACE are RDBMS engines. Access is a rapid application development (RAD) tool that can use ANY RDBMS that supports ODBC to store application data. In fact, it was the SQL Server team that actually announced to the world the death of "Access" in 2000 and in 2007. Why? They controlled Jet (and still do) and in 2000 (or maybe 2002), MS added a desktop version of SQL Server which could easily be installed along side Jet to be used for application data. So, in their minds, Jet was dead and so "Access" was dead. Then again in 2007, the Access team took a copy of Jet and made it into ACE, thereby removing the SQL Server team from the path of development dependency. So again, the SQL Server team sang from the rafters "the witch is dead". I don't understand at all their complete inability to understand that "Access" is a comparable tool to use to create applications that use their precious SQL Server as the BE. For some reason, they persist in considering "Access" a challenge to their world dominance.

The confusion lies with the pathological connection between Jet/ACE and Access.
1. Even thought there are TWO complete script based design mechanism for Jet/ACE using DAO and ADO, "Access" is the graphical tool used to design database objects. Think of "Access" in this case as the equivalent of SSMS (SQL Server Management Studio).
2. Even though "Access" can use application data stored in ANY RDBMS that offers ODBC, "Access" must use a Jet/ACD .mdb/.accdb to store its own objects such as forms/reports/etc. So "Access" always was and always will be completely dependent on some desktop database engine for its own internal "data". This is the reason why your "Access" FE can never be compiled into an .exe. An .exe cannot hold data and cannot be modified on the fly. The whole point of an .exe is that It NEVER gets modified, whereas an .mdb or .accdb gets modified every time you open it, just because that's the way "Access" works. Not to mention that even the FE usually has tables even if they only hold menu items or the current version of the app.
 
Last edited:

Isaac

Lifelong Learner
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,437
JohnPapa beat me to it.
That was me that said that. I'm glad to see my comments got some support, I was worried that for my subtle joke about Access and Relational being in the same column in that picture, (a not-so-subtle suggestion that such a thing may be at least a bit of an oxymoron), I worried I'd be tied to a post and beat to death with a Don't You Dare hammer. ha ha. Glad to see that is not the case.
 

JohnPapa

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 19:42
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
507
JohnPapa beat me to it.

"Access" is NOT a RDBMS no matter how many people call it that. Jeese Louse, Even the Microsoft SQL Server people call "Access" a database and think "Access" is their competitor!!!!! rather than a complementary tool to create applications. Jet and ACE are RDBMS engines. Access is a rapid application development (RAD) tool that can use ANY RDBMS that supports ODBC to store application data. In fact, it was the SQL Server team that actually announced to the world the death of "Access" in 2000 and in 2007. Why? They controlled Jet (and still do) and in 2000 (or maybe 2002), MS added a desktop version of SQL Server which could easily be installed along side Jet to be used for application data. So, in their minds, Jet was dead and so "Access" was dead. Then again in 2007, the Access team took a copy of Jet and made it into ACE, thereby removing the SQL Server team from the path of development dependency. So again, the SQL Server team sang from the rafters "the witch is dead". I don't understand at all their complete inability to understand that "Access" is a comparable tool to use to create applications that use their precious SQL Server as the BE. For some reason, they persist in considering "Access" a challenge to their world dominance.

The confusion lies with the pathological connection between Jet/ACE and Access.
1. Even thought there are TWO complete script based design mechanism for Jet/ACE using DAO and ADO, "Access" is the graphical tool used to design database objects. Think of "Access" in this case as the equivalent of SSMS (SQL Server Management Studio).
2. Even though "Access" can use application data stored in ANY RDBMS that offers ODBC, "Access" must use a Jet/ACD .mdb/.accdb to store its own objects such as forms/reports/etc. So "Access" always was and always will be completely dependent on some desktop database engine for its own internal "data". This is the reason why your "Access" FE can never be compiled into an .exe. An .exe cannot hold data and cannot be modified on the fly. The whole point of an .exe is that It NEVER gets modified, whereas an .mdb or .accdb gets modified every time you open it, just because that's the way "Access" works. Not to mention that even the FE usually has tables even if they only hold menu items or the current version of the app.

Many thanks for the background information. I know many developers who have never used Jet/ACE as their database with Access.
 

Isaac

Lifelong Learner
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,437
Many thanks for the background information. I know many developers who have never used Jet/ACE as their database with Access.
One of the first non-Access tech people I ever learned anything from was a VB/SQL developer who relied heavily on ADP's combined with SQL Server, for deploying small apps to departments.
Don't hear much about ADPs any more, other than from aaronkempf whose frustration I agree with.

I would put ADP and Access web as the #1 and #2 greatest Access-related gems, killed by MS. Darn it, now I'm feeling depressed. :cry:
 
Last edited:

isladogs

CID VIP
Local time
Today, 17:42
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
13,946
Further proof that Access is not about to die was given by the Access development team leader Ebo Quanseh in a talk to the Denver Access User Group (DAUG) recently, It is in fact more actively being developed than has been the case for many years.

A 1 hour video of his talk is available on You Tube: youtube.com/watch?v=x_o3F89EcBIA


I've skimmed the video and there is a lot of info about new features in there. I think well worth watching in full

For example, a new web browser control based on Edge Chromium will be released in mid October. The existing IE browser control will still be available if needed.

As well as the Monaco SQL editor already announced, there will be further improvements to the query editor and linked table manager as well as a new date/time datatype (with greater range and increased precision).

Furthermore, 32-bit Access will become large address aware

A lot of the talk is about data connectivity but as I haven't watched that part yet, I'll not try to summarise it at this stage
 

Isaac

Lifelong Learner
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,437
That was an excellent article and a fun read. The point about "code-free" stood out to me, as I've watched so much stuff happen under that mantra, with mixed feelings. And that is a twin subject to "power users" category.

It's a source of infinite conflict for me, theoretically.

Is the thing inherently mostly "bad" because it lets people break most of the rules in the book, while simultaneously fooling them into thinking they haven't, because sometimes "it just works" ?
Or, is the thing inherently mostly good & our friend, because, no matter the skill level obtained, it was the jumping-off point where so many people originally cut their teeth? Obviously the # of viewpoints is the # of people in the discussion, just about.

As the article demonstrates, Access is just a tricky thing to categorize in (at least my) mind. If MS had left the entire Tables aspect of Access out of it, that would make it much easier and less controversial to categorize. Thanks for the article.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 13:42
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
29,759
Access was originally intended as a power user tool.. The "problem" was that the original development team did such an outstanding job that it can also be used by professional developers. I bow to their genius.
 

vhung

Member
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
144
hello everyone
>my question is?
do we have the authority to ask and suggest to "microsoft"/"access" for the satisfaction of access users needs?
 

theDBguy

I’m here to help
Staff member
Local time
Today, 10:42
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
12,532
where to start and how to do it orderly?
I would start with reading the terms of service, so you understand what it does. Then, search for your suggestion, just in case someone already submitted it. If so, you can just add your vote to it. Otherwise, you submit your suggestion based on your priorities.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom