I see no reason why you can't continue to use access as the front end.
If you have the budgets, and time to re-write the application, then I guess
you
can choose anything you like.
However, if you wish to keep the application, and not re-write, and not have
to re-train the users, then why not continue to use access as the front end?
My question is do we keep Access as the front end (we'd probably upgrade
to 2003)
This is going to be up to you. I see no reason why not to continue to use
ms-access. I mean, you got to write the application in something.
or would we get better performance using a different solution
For the number of users you have, I see no reason not to use ms-access.
It is a great platform. Do you have the developers...or perhaps you will
spend the time and learn .net? (you will need a few months of time). I mean,
how long did it take the people to learn ms-access? (it took me more then a
year to be become productive in ms-access). And, the sample applies to any
platform you will adopt.
If Access, would it be best use MDB's or ADP's?
It is by far and away best to keep it as a MDB (and, of course, you used a
split database..and always distributed a mde to each user anyway..right??).
I would only choose a ADP for a brand new from scratch product (and even
then...likely I would not use a adp). So, for a existing application, it
makes NO
sense to use a ADP..as you can't use any of your DAO code.
The main consideration is that we need to perform some complicated
queries on large datasets, which ideally should happen on the SQL server
(I'm currently learning about stored procedures and views etc).
Yes, for processing intensive things, you certainly want that to run on the
server, but you still need to choose a programming environment that lets you
write code, and create the application (and sql server does not do that!!).
If you got the time,a nd resources, and have the developer(s) to re-write,
then you can do such. It really comes down to budgets, and what benefits
you get by re-writing the application.
The skill level of the developer will make or break the project regardless
of the "conversion" issues.
I am a better hockey coach when Wayne Gretzky is on the team.
Hence the #1 consideration is at what level the developer is at. There are
certainly more levels then just "trained" or "not trained". Generally there
are a "lot" of skill levels, but the following breakdown is sufficient. **
Stage 1 Innocent (never heard of the product)
Stage 2 Aware (Has read an article about X)
Stage 3 Apprentice (has attended a three-day seminar)
Stage 4 Practitioner (ready to use X on a real project)
Stage 5 Journeyman (uses X naturally and automatically in his job)
Stage 6 Master (has internalized X, knows when to break the rules)
Stage 7 Expert (writes books, gives lectures, looks for ways to extend x)
One should NEVER attempt a project with a team consisting with Stage 3 or
lower people. This is a sure fire formula for failure. The team can consist
of stage 4's, but they should have at least access to Stage 5, or 6.
So, if your developers are skilled in the new platform, then that is
certainly a possible here to re-write.
However, I see no reason why you can't continue to use ms-access as the
front end to sql server. I mean, if your developers don't know how to use
sql server, then you can get a garbage and slow application if it is written
in VB, vb.net, or ms-access. The performance here is not going to be the
fact that you used VB or ms-access, but in fact that your developers know
how to utilize sql server.