Re: What database shall I use???

Microsoft spent a considerable amount of money and effort on the new versions of this product. The new features allow Access to work as a native front end to sql server. This is a NATIVE CONNECTION with no local tables.

This means Access is now a very
scalable product, and can be used in the Corporate environment. MS clearly considers the server based database market a key technology in their farm of products. Any product that encourages the use of their server products is clearly a strategic and important product.

It is interesting, but Access is now kind of two products. It is possible that the new Access ADP project builder should have been called SQL "CLIENT BUILDER". In fact, they probably should have done this. In other words they should have re-named the product to sell to the corporate market. In addition, they could have kept the Access name (hence, sell the *exact* same product with two different names). Microsoft really missed a big opportunity here.

I believe that this name change was not done due to the very large user base that Access already had. It really was a catch 22. The real reason to change the name is that Access has a *very* bad "taste", or "image" in the corporate market. This image was one of Access not being a industrial strength database. It is common to hear many database people say that Access is a toy

With the "ADP" feature of Access, it is now a true client product, and thus can be considered a true corporate tool. It also means that Access CAN NOW BE used in Mission Critical applications.

For large mission critical applications Access is not appropriate when used with *NO* server.

You also have to understand that Access is not a database server, but really is only a client to some type of database. That database can even be Oracle.

Thus, even when you choose Oracle as your server, you still have to decide what tools, and what you are going to use for the client.

--
Albert D. Kallal
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
kallal_at_msn.com