A2007 - OLE vs. Attachements

[Jay Oken]

I would like to add a picture to a record but do not know the best way to do
it. From what I can see OLE gives the option to "link" to the picture file
rather than imbed the picture in the database which then bloats my database.
The "attachment" type field has a nicer interface when I put it on a form
but bloats the database. Is there a way to use the Attachment field type but
have it be a link to the picture.

Thanks,
J

 

[Mark Andrews]

Have you considered using the attachment field and bloating?
Pros and cons for each approach. A picture to a contact record is probably
the typical senerio
Microsoft envisioned for using the attachment field "as is". Not storing
tons and tons of graphics etc...
You get to see a preview of the image (for most formats). I believe they
made it better on the "amount of bloating that occurs".

I don't think you can use the attachment field to hold a link.
You can add/extract attachments via code to move things back and forth from
the filesystem to the database.

HTH
Mark

 

[JohnLute]

This is ridiculous. So let's not ban a person who is clearly violating terms.
Let's instead create a MASSIVE online "info-attack" on them. Just ridiculous.
So reminiscent of the Aaron Kempf drama. If Steve is the person that you
claim then why oh, WHY are they NOT simply banned and their multitude of
posts simply deleted?

Bordering on stupid.

 

[Piet Linden]

In all fairness, though, this post lacks the usual advertising... Or
is there something my browser doesn't show?

 

[JohnLute]

I don't see it, either. So in this instance one could argue that StopThis
Advertising is in violation of harrassment.

These kinds of "wars" ruin things for everyone. StopThisAdvertising claims,
"We warned him a thousand times..."

Who is "we" and what/who has given "we" the authority to warn ANYBODY? I
just reviewed the TOU:
http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.mspx#E1

These don't seem to have been altered for a couple years. If Steve is such a
violator then he should be properly reported to MS.

Steve appears to be a troll and to have taken on other identities. So if it
can be so easily proven then simply do so and be done with it. I'm entirely
annoyed by self-appointed forum police!

Considering that Steve has been warned "a thousand times" yet is still free
to post makes it CLEAR that those who have been warning him are entirely out
of line.

 

[Gina Whipp]

John,

I am not defedning anyone but please note that the TOU you preseted is for
Software. The Rules of Conduct for the Newsgroup can be found here...
http://www.microsoft.com/library/gallery/components/wn/3/locales/help/help_en-US.htm#RulesofConduct.
And to quote...

"Advertising/Solicitation: These communities were created as a forum for
providing peer-to-peer assistance on Microsoft products and services. We ask
that you refrain from posting advertisements or solicitations that do not
pertain directly to the intended use and purpose of the newsgroup or chat."


1. No, I have to agree I do not see it in this posting either. HOWEVER, I
have seen it as much as 9 (nine) times ALL in seperate posts.

2. and 3. As for who the "We" are please refer to postings where Steve has
advertised. If you do a search on Steve you will find the "We" and the
solicitations.

3. He has been reported several times and has had to make several
adjustments to post here. I am not going to defend Steve or
StopThisAdvertising. I will say if you don't want to see either one please
use Killfile.

--
Gina Whipp

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

 

[JohnLute]

Thanks for the clarification, Gina. I'm certainly not defending anyone,
either. I'm simply saying that the "info-attack" on Steve is as ridiculous
and annoying as Steve's trolling for $$$.

This smacks of the Aaron Kempf issue. Good GAWSH - if the Rules of Conduct
are so explicit and clear than why in the world are these things allowed to
blow up like this?

Simply ban the offender and get on with life. I really appreciate these
forums but I find these playground antics just a bit much and feel compelled
to voice my irritation.

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

The problem is that these newsgroups aren't moderated, nor can they be.

You're using Microsoft's web interface to post, but you're actually posting
to NNTP newsgroups, not a website.

The groups exist on a multitude of servers, not simply the ones that
Microsoft administers themselves (msnews.microsoft.com). While Microsoft
conceivably could delete posts originating on their server, they would be
unable to delete posts originating on other servers.

 

[JohnLute]

Hi, Doug.

Well, then it seems to me that the *bigger* problem is poor planning. If I
were to initiate a fine forum like this (and it truly is fine) then I'd make
sure that I could actually ENFORCE the Rules of Conduct that people have been
asked to respect! Otherwise, why bother with any rules at all?

Personaly, I find the "info-attack" (I don't know what else to call it)
towards Steve far more disturbing than his trolling for $$$. It's downright
CREEPY. The fact that all of that effort goes for naught because ultimately,
the rules can't be enforced makes it more a travesty than anything.

Yikes!

 

[Gina Whipp]

--
Gina Whipp

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

 

[Gina Whipp]

Oh dear...

--
Gina Whipp

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

 

[JohnLute]

Steve:

Gina's one of the best. Your comments are uncalled for and you should be
banned for making them. If there was a magic button I could push to make that
happen I would do it without hesitation.

 

[Banana]

Well, FWIW, NNTP protocol, which is what this newsgroup is based on is
much old, almost old as the internet itself. You may want to read a Wiki
on NNTP and realize that Microsoft was simply making available an avenue
to what then was popular and reliable protocol for disseminating
discussions. It looks like Microsoft formed the Microsoft.Public
newsgroups in 1994, which is before any reliable web forum software even
existed and the only other good place was AOL chatroom (?!)

 

[Gina Whipp]

Thank you John... but no worries, I'm used to it.

--
Gina Whipp

"I feel I have been denied critical, need to know, information!" - Tremors
II

http://www.regina-whipp.com/index_files/TipList.htm

 

[John... Visio MVP]

So you have always posted as "Steve" <[email protected]>? Or do you not
consider changing your posting address as an adjustment?

John... Visio MVP

 

[David W. Fenton]

it seems to me that the *bigger* problem is poor planning. If I
were to initiate a fine forum like this (and it truly is fine)
then I'd make sure that I could actually ENFORCE the Rules of
Conduct that people have been asked to respect! Otherwise, why
bother with any rules at all?

You really have no clue about Usenet, then.

Microsoft created the newsgroups. That means they created the
charter for the newsgroups. Repeated violation of the terms of a
newsgroup's charter can be grounds for losing your account with an
ISP, or the news provider.

This is not enforced as much as it once was, partly because many
ISPs ignore Usenet (neglecting their news server, or outsourcing it,
or providing none at all), and no longer employ people who
understand the rules of Usenet (people like yourself, for instance).

One aspect of the dropping of news servers by ISPs is that many
individuals now go to third-party news providers, either paid or
free, and that makes them *more* subject to discipline, since their
account is not with an ISP for general purposes including Usenet,
but it is with a Usenet provider for the sold purpose of using the
newsgroups. Thus, abuse of the terms of a newsgroup can easily be
punished by these 3rd-party news providers banning your account.

In this case, I think you have a point that people attacked Steve
for behavior he hasn't exhibited in this particular thread. That's
wrong, but hardly inexplicable. Steve has made his bed and he has to
lie in it. That means he's going to get treated unfairly in some
cases, but given that he has no respect for the groups he trolls for
work in, I shed no tears for him.

On the other hand, I wish there was more encouragement of his "good"
posts (like the one in this thread), since that might serve to nudge
him into behaving properly, such that he posted more helpful
responses and fewer solicitations. So, yes, it's unfortunate that
this happened, but it was initiated by someone who has been in my
killfile for a long time (and will remain there for the foreseeable
future), so that should tell you something right there.

 

[David W. Fenton]

It looks like Microsoft formed the Microsoft.Public
newsgroups in 1994, which is before any reliable web forum
software even existed and the only other good place was AOL
chatroom (?!)

I would say that a good news reader and a reliable newsfeed are
still vastly superior to any web-based discussion forum I've ever
encountered. Maybe the approach seeni in Google Wave will change
that, but we're a long way from that.

 

[John W. Vinson]

It looks like Microsoft formed the Microsoft.Public
newsgroups in 1994, which is before any reliable web forum software even
existed and the only other good place was AOL chatroom (?!)

.... or CompuServe, where I was a Sysop before I started posting here...

 

[Fred]

From what I've seen, this profane name calling by Steve represents a new low.
What terrible behavior!

Any regular reader knows that Gina's accuracy, expertise and helpfulness
have been established, beyond reproach. Not to mention the ultimate in
restraint is responding to such junk. So, now, beyond the other issues, he
has established himself who commits profane name calling in the forum against
such people.

 

[JohnLute]

David,

Thanks for the insight. I appreciate it however I don't need to have a clue
about all of the technology.That's your world! I'm simply an every day schlub
of a USER who has been asked to follow RULES. Now if the rules can't be
enforced then who is it that REALLY doesn't have a clue?

The rules might as well be thrown out if they can't be enforced. Since they
can't be enforced we have people creating websites - bordering on clinical
obsessiveness - that wage some kind of creepy info-attack on another person
just because they've "broken" these un-enforceable rules!

I guess I could figure out how to use the killfile but why should I? If the
rules are clear and users agree to them then MS should find a way to enforce
them. THAT is my point.

Chasing after Steve at every post - particularly if he's merely providing
info - is in equal violation of the rules. 2 wrongs don't = 1 right.

I think I learned that in 1st grade!