Advice on which developing tool to learn next.

[Jeff via AccessMonster.com]

I'm looking to take the next step in developing web-based front-ends for my
SQL Server databases. My experience is as follows: I first started with
Access a couple of years back, then moved to SQL Server. Recently, I have
been working with ADPs and I really like it as a backend development tool.
So I guess the next step is to enter the .NET world for my frontends but
where do I start? VS.Net? VB.Net?

 

[J. Clay]

A year and a half ago, I wrote my first ASP.Net web site using an Access
Database, and I won't go back. The learning curve is a bit steep, but once
you get it, it has some great tools. I recently got VS.Net and am now using
it to develop with. I also took a week long class on vb.net, which helped a
lot.

Good luck,
Jim

 

[Vadim Rapp]

Hello Jeff,
You wrote in conference microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver on Wed, 01
Jun 2005 18:57:45 GMT:

JvA> I'm looking to take the next step in developing web-based front-ends
JvA> for my SQL Server databases. My experience is as follows: I first
started
JvA> with Access a couple of years back, then moved to SQL Server.
JvA> Recently, I have been working with ADPs and I really like it as a
JvA> backend development tool. So I guess the next step is to enter the
JvA> .NET world for my frontends but where do I start? VS.Net? VB.Net?

This really depends on your goal. .Net world has little in common with
coding for Access. If your purpose is to acquire the most impressive skill
set, then yes, .Net is the way to go. Probably the same if you are going to
develop internet-related applications (web pages and such). But if your goal
is to be effective coder for traditional desktop and backoffice
applications, then stick with ADP. From my experience, I would say that
web-based development is several times less effective, slow, and error-prone
compared to the "traditional" development. If there's no real necessity for
it other than desire to be "on the edge", then forget it. Of course you will
try it, but when in 6 hours you manage to code what you'd do in "regular"
vba in 15 minutes, remember what I said, and don't attribute it to the
learning curve. Down the curve, 6 hours will become 2 hours, but hardly
less.

As an illustration of what .net application looks like, try sql server 2005
public beta, where management tools are written in .net. I won't even
comment on it - try it, compare to the equivalent tools in sql server 2000,
and make your own mind, remembering that it's written by supposedly
top-notch developers.

regards,

Vadim Rapp

 

[aaron.kempf]

hey you're crazy.. dont worry about .net until 2005 ships

what you really need to learn is Analysis Services. OLAP rocks.. it is
a lot more fun than oldschool database stuff.

SQL 2005 is VERY important. but Microsoft is too drunk to make it
compatable with ADP so screw MS and learn mySql or something

 

[Steve Jorgensen]

I'm looking to take the next step in developing web-based front-ends for my
SQL Server databases. My experience is as follows: I first started with
Access a couple of years back, then moved to SQL Server. Recently, I have
been working with ADPs and I really like it as a backend development tool.
So I guess the next step is to enter the .NET world for my frontends but
where do I start? VS.Net? VB.Net?

There are many possible next steps, none more valid or invalid than any other.

You could learn ASP.NET (with C# and/or VB.NET), Java (using JSP, Struts,
or...), PHP, Zope (Python), ColdFusion (Java - I think), or any of a number of
other things. Each one has unique strengths and weaknesses, different costs
for tools and infrastructure, different market saturation levels, etc.

 

[Vadim Rapp]

Hello (e-mail address removed),
You wrote in conference microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver on 24 Jun
2005 17:18:16 -0700:

ak> hey you're crazy..

nice start...

ak> dont worry about .net until 2005 ships

why? you think they will rewrite it in assembler in the last moment?

ak> SQL 2005 is VERY important.

frankly, with all the marketing hoopla around it, I still don't see what's
so important. In real life, the nice glossy concepts of datamining,
warehousing and such, just don't take place. We read about all that in every
issue of the magazine, but when I call customer service of a major company,
I still have to spell my name letter by letter, or they won't find me. And
my own major bank where I have several accounts for 10 years, is still
sending me junk mail "come and open an account". And same does comcast, and
sbc, and everyone of them. Even spammers, who are pretty much on the cutting
edge of technology because of everyday challenges, can't come up in their
offers with anything but a full bs. Which means that all of them are too
dumb to filter their junk through their own customer database, a 5 minute
project. Which means that the _real_ level of corporate IT in most companies
is such that I think couple of hours of training on abacus would be far more
relevant for them than sql server 2005.

For example, customer service in my company may misspell the name of the
caller when searching his name in the database, and still he will be found
because of quite trivial phonetic search I implemented in the project. I
never saw it elsewhere, wherever I called. So, what are those bright
corporate ideas for which sql2k was too weak?

ak> but Microsoft is too drunk to make it compatable with ADP

my adp works fine with 2005 here... what's not compatible?

ak> so screw MS and learn mySql or something

you mean, mysql _is_ compatible with adp?


regards,

Vadim

 

[aaron.kempf]

warehousing DOES take place; it is fun for the whole family.. and it's
EASY

Analysis Services changed the world 5 years ago, when SQL 2000 shipped.

You know what's going to change the world about SQL 2005?

the PIVOT keyword; i mean-- finally SQL Server is going to be as
powerful as MDB in the crosstab arena.

I'm _STOKED_ that ADP work against your 2005 install; what version you
got?
that would make me SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO happy i
dont think that i could control myself

 

[aaron.kempf]

warehousing DOES take place; it is fun for the whole family.. and it's
EASY

Analysis Services changed the world 5 years ago, when SQL 2000 shipped.

You know what's going to change the world about SQL 2005?

the PIVOT keyword; i mean-- finally SQL Server is going to be as
powerful as MDB in the crosstab arena.

I'm _STOKED_ that ADP work against your 2005 install; what version you
got?
that would make me SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO happy i
dont think that i could control myself

 

[aaron.kempf]

warehousing DOES take place; it is fun for the whole family.. and it's
EASY

Analysis Services changed the world 5 years ago, when SQL 2000 shipped.

You know what's going to change the world about SQL 2005?

the PIVOT keyword; i mean-- finally SQL Server is going to be as
powerful as MDB in the crosstab arena.

I'm _STOKED_ that ADP work against your 2005 install; what version you
got?
that would make me SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO happy i
dont think that i could control myself

 

[Vadim Rapp]

ak> I'm _STOKED_ that ADP work against your 2005 install; what version you
ak> got?

July build. I did not notice though that it did not work before, though it
might be that I forgot to test ADP against it - was busy filing other bug
reports. What specifically did not work?

Vadim

 

[Sylvain Lafontaine]

The last time that I did make some tests, the ADP project by itself was
working good agains SQL-2005 but the design tools of ADP didn't.

Maybe you can make a quick test for the design tools against the july build?

 

[aaron.kempf]

yeah I was almost stop my infatada against MS if ADP even half-worked
against SQL 2005.

I mean-- of all the things that would save my opinion of MS

-aaron

 

[Vadim Rapp]

Hello Sylvain,
You wrote in conference microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver on Wed, 29
Jun 2005 23:24:57 -0400:

SL> The last time that I did make some tests, the ADP project by itself was
SL> working good agains SQL-2005 but the design tools of ADP didn't.

SL> Maybe you can make a quick test for the design tools against the july
SL> build?

yes, design tools don't work, intentionally. Access isssues a warning, and
changes are not saved.

I sent an inquiry about it, will post the response.


Vadim

 

[Vadim Rapp]

Here's the response from Microsoft

====
The current version of ADPs will not work against SQL. The Access team might
revisit this in a version that comes after SQL Server 2005 ships, but that's
just my speculation. I'd suggest you give feedback directly to the Access
team on their newsgroups.
====

Not much information, obviously. I would specilate that probably Access
future is now in question, with "competition" from .Net. Otherwise, they
would have been working on that "revisiting" already for a long time. If I'm
right, then, given that the capabilities of anything in .net don't approach
10% of what Access does (to which the same sql server 2005 management tools
are good example), not even to mention the performance, the term
"degradation" seems appropriate.

Vadim Rapp



VR> Hello Sylvain,
VR> You wrote in conference microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver on Wed,
VR> 29 Jun 2005 23:24:57 -0400:

SL>> The last time that I did make some tests, the ADP project by itself
SL>> was working good agains SQL-2005 but the design tools of ADP didn't.

SL>> Maybe you can make a quick test for the design tools against the july
SL>> build?

VR> yes, design tools don't work, intentionally. Access isssues a warning,
VR> and changes are not saved.

VR> I sent an inquiry about it, will post the response.

VR> Vadim

With best regards, Vadim Rapp. E-mail: (e-mail address removed)

 

[Sylvain Lafontaine]

Thanks for the post.

As it's often the case with MS, this response rises more questions (and
doubts) about the future of Access - not only for ADP but also for MDB - as
a FrontEnd to SQL-Server than the number it answers.