Re: Web pages from a database

Hi,

I agree with both of these points Access is a nice place to start learning. 

> Most data storage and retrieval needs on the web do not exceed MS
>Access' capabilities. 

This is not true, as in you have got to be kidding!

Access is also a very nice front end to other DBs though ODBC. I think it
makes for a very powerfull mid range level user tool for getting the most
flexablity out of a database with little or no programming. 
But the Access database itself is not something I would trust for anything
other than a personal single user DB. Access has always had the problem of
trying to act like a big time DB, but not coming anywhere close in reality.
The combination of those produces bugs that are not easy to get around. 

I am not saying that if you use Access for a multi user database that the
project will automaticly fail. I am just saying that as a consultant it
scares the hell out of me to try to do a project using Access and be able to
sleep at night :) I even get a little afraid of 97, 2000 etc differences
when I use Access as a ODBC front end, but doing things that way at least
limits the number of issues I may have to deal with. 



Eric 



At 05:37 AM 1/25/02 -0500, Melanie Gann wrote:
>Another thing to think about is your customer base.
>
>For example, I run a small [one woman] shop. Most of my customers are other
>small businesses  [larger businesses unless you have "an in" go mostly
>towards the larger development firms].
>
>My experience is that small businesses don't want to pay license fees
>unless they have to. For them PHP and MYSQL are a very good choice. I have
>also used MS Access for several non-transactional type of databases and not
>had any problems.
>
>Regards,
>Melanie
>
>
>At 10:58 PM 1/24/02 -0500, Michael Gerholdt wrote:
>>MS Access is cheap. It requires little administrative expertise. It is very
>>portable in that the entire database comprises one file. It is a great place
>>for beginners to learn about databases, normalization, querying and data
>>retrieval.
>>
>>MS MSDE is the MS SQL Server engine and is for development only - not
>>production. But everything developed in MSDE can be imported to MS SQL
>>Server with no modification at all.
>>
>>MS SQL Server 2000 is an industry-level, heavy duty database. It can be very
>>expensive. It requires database administration on a level far different from
>>that of MS Access if it is to be used in such a manner that takes advantage
>>of its many powerful features.
>>
>>
>>MS Access can handle quite a bit of traffic, but it is essentially a desktop
>>application which can be used by workgroups. It is not intended to be used
>>in an international service such as the web. Still, if use is moderate it
>>does ok. Most data storage and retrieval needs on the web do not exceed MS
>>Access' capabilities. That does not mean it is suited to the purpose,
>>however - just that it does real good. Where it really shines is in its user
>>interface and reporting tools.
>>
>>But if there is a need for a truly robust, flexible, secure enterprise
>>database then MS Access is not the place to go.
>>
>>mySQL demands much respect - more than MS Access - but it is not an Oracle
>>nor an MS SQL Server either by a long stretch. I know it has some very
>>devoted users; I use it as well. It's a great tool. Probably quite robust
>>and can handle lots of concurrent demands. But that said, Oracle and MS
>>Server are in a league that mySQL only dreams of, in any way you want to
>>measure.
>>
>>Those are some thoughts in response to your question.
>>
>>pmg
>>
>>>
>>> What condierations and guidelines are people following about when to
>>> use MS Access or the new MS MSDE or MS SQLServer?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Second Street Web Design
>http://www.second-street.com
>
>

http://www.kwinternet.com/eric
(250) 655 - 9513 (PST Time Zone)

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA