Access, VBA and .NET SQL Server

[Guest]

may be a stupid question but I have often wondered with some apps I have
installed they included MDB File with just tables. I am only assuming that
you can develop Applications using VBA or .NET and store data in tables. My
next question is did .NET replace Visual Basic 6.0 and what is there
relelationship if any.

My last question is about SQL Server. I keep hearing about people using SQL
server as a back end and using access forms and reports as the front end.
Can someone explain SQL Server VS MS Access. Just curious.

Thanks,

 

[Guest]

Hi Brian,

...installed they included MDB File with just tables.

Yes, you can store data in JET databases.

Yes, .NET is Microsoft's preferred migration plan for VB programmers. I'm
not expert enough in .NET to talk about the relationship between the two.

Can someone explain SQL Server VS MS Access. Just curious.

SQL Server = Mercedes Benz
MS Access = Volkswagon bug

In other words, SQL Server offers many more features, but at a higher price,
than MS Access. It is considered a true Client/Server database, whereas
Access is File/Server. For example, SQL Server is better when:

You want to develop from a single code base scalable from a single user to
thousands of users.
You require support for Microsoft Windows integrated security.
You require greater reliability, such as transaction logging.
You want to develop stored procedures or triggers.
You are using Access to design databases that will be accessed by
multi-threaded or Web-based applications.


Tom Wickerath
Microsoft Access MVP

http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/expert_contributors.html
http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/search.html
__________________________________________

 

[Guest]

Thanks, I appreciate the info


Hi Brian,

Yes, you can store data in JET databases.

Yes, .NET is Microsoft's preferred migration plan for VB programmers. I'm
not expert enough in .NET to talk about the relationship between the two.


SQL Server = Mercedes Benz
MS Access = Volkswagon bug

In other words, SQL Server offers many more features, but at a higher price,
than MS Access. It is considered a true Client/Server database, whereas
Access is File/Server. For example, SQL Server is better when:

You want to develop from a single code base scalable from a single user to
thousands of users.
You require support for Microsoft Windows integrated security.
You require greater reliability, such as transaction logging.
You want to develop stored procedures or triggers.
You are using Access to design databases that will be accessed by
multi-threaded or Web-based applications.


Tom Wickerath
Microsoft Access MVP

http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/expert_contributors.html
http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/search.html
__________________________________________

 

[Guest]

Hi Brian,

Here is an article that you might want to read:

Database Evolution: Microsoft® Access within an Organization's Database
Strategy
http://www.fmsinc.com/tpapers/genaccess/DBOD.asp


Tom Wickerath
Microsoft Access MVP

http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/expert_contributors.html
http://www.access.qbuilt.com/html/search.html
__________________________________________

 

[Steve Schapel]

Brian,

Tom's perspective here relates to comparing SQL Server to JET, the
default database engine that comes with Access. As an additional
perspective, this is how I look at it...
SQL Server = Mercedes Benz
MS Access = Watermelon

In other words, they are so different from each other that comparison is
meaningless. The core of Access is that it is a RAD tool for building
frontend applications to work with databases. Which database you choose
for your Access application to run against is another question, and
certainly the JET engine (to be superceded in Access 2007 with an
upgraded model), is one option. But in the end, this is not what makes
Access what Access is. What Access does best is something that is
nothing to do with SQL Server. You can't eat a Mercedes Benz, and you
can't beat a great watermelon.