How can anyone use this?

[Eric Kolotyluk]

<flame>
Up until now I believed that Microsoft Word was the worst application I
had ever used. After spending over 30 hours trying to write a simple
(note I really mean simple) inventory application, I now see that
Microsoft Access is 'truly' the most abysmal application I have ever used.

I once taught an undergraduate course in Computer User Interface Design
and one of the principles that is a sine qua non
(http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=sine qua non) of user
interface design is "The Principle of Least Astonishment." Yet I find
Microsoft Access consistently astonishing, and astonishingly bad. 80% of
the time when I try to do something I consider reasonable, Access won't
allow me to do it, or gives me the ubiquitous #Error? or #Name? result.
Many times the documentation or design leads me to believe something is
possible, but I find an inconsistent dead end.

Like Microsoft Word, Access easily gets confused about the state of
things and requires a restart. And in some cases it requires a reboot of
the O/S to get back to a working state.

I am absolutely convinced that the average IQ of an Access Developer is
below 80, and the average IQ of an Access Marketing executive is below
60. These people have absolutely no grounding in mathematics or
computing science. Well maybe the developers aren't that stupid, but the
original Foxbase developers certainly were - and the Microsoft
developers haven't been given the chance to make things right.

I can only imagine that people who develop applications using Access are
hackers of the most profound art, achieving the impossible with
incomprehensible.

How can anyone use this?
</flame>

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools.

 

[UpRider]

Then use something else more to your liking. Access is fine with me. Word's
OK, too.

UpRider

 

[Eric Kolotyluk]

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to
remain silent - Thomas Jefferson

It has been said that all it takes for evil to prevail is for good men
to do nothing - Jason Dulle

 

[Albert D.Kallal]

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to
remain silent - Thomas Jefferson

Yes, here is another one from TJ

"Light and liberty go together." --Thomas Jefferson

and, even better:

"Everyone, certainly, must form his judgment on the evidence accessible to
himself." --Thomas Jefferson

So, one does have to look at the evidence here. MS-access is by far and away
the MOST widely used desktop database development system. The MAJORITY of
users of the product find it to be really incredible, and do not hold your
views on this matter.

Of course, by Light, this means a person of reason and experience. So, given
you are making a comparison here...what other software development product
have you used besides ms-access? Make no mistake here, ms-access sis a
software development tool, like VB, or C++. It will take some time and study
on your part to learn this tool. However, you must have some other
development platform you are comparing this product too, for if not, you
speak from lack of knowledge...and not experience. The very thing TJ warns
about.....

 

[John Marshall, MVP]

You talk in general terms, can you be more specific in what the problems are
or what you find misleading? As others have mentioned using Access
requires a reasonable understanding of the concepts of how databases work in
the real world.

I have used both Access and Word for many years and I have never come across
a need to reboot due to these products.(Even on a MAC). I find both products
quite stable.

Didn't Simon Fraser teach you how to postulate an argument? Do you have any
facts to base your personal attacks on the Access Developers or Marketing
executives at Microsoft? You also show a great lack of knowledge about the
history of FoxPro and Access. They are two seperate products and FoxPro was
not morphed into Access. They were seperate products since the beginning and
remain so.

Personal attacks on Access developers, again wth no basis in fact? Other
than to PCD, your description does not truly represent most of the Access
developers who visit these newsgroups.

This is the real world, not the Utopian world of the academic. Word, Access
and the people who use and develop with these products are not perfect.
Rather than strive for 100% perfection, they just get the job done.

John... Visio MVP

 

[Eric Kolotyluk]

Yes, here is another one from TJ

"Light and liberty go together." --Thomas Jefferson

and, even better:

"Everyone, certainly, must form his judgment on the evidence accessible to
himself." --Thomas Jefferson

So, one does have to look at the evidence here. MS-access is by far and away
the MOST widely used desktop database development system. The MAJORITY of
users of the product find it to be really incredible, and do not hold your
views on this matter.

Of course, by Light, this means a person of reason and experience. So, given
you are making a comparison here...what other software development product
have you used besides ms-access? Make no mistake here, ms-access sis a
software development tool, like VB, or C++. It will take some time and study
on your part to learn this tool. However, you must have some other
development platform you are comparing this product too, for if not, you
speak from lack of knowledge...and not experience. The very thing TJ warns
about.....

I don't think it's cogent to say that because something is popular or
widely used it is the best, because people often choose things for
reasons other than quality. For example, often people choose things
because everyone else does and they may not want to be different than
everyone else. I choose to try Access simply because it was so
ubiquitous. I had tried it years ago and had a bad experience, but I
thought it might have gotten better over the last 10 years.

While I cannot compare Access to other similar database products, in
terms of a development environment I could cite Eclipse (an IDE). From
the first time I started using Eclipse I needed no documentation,
everything just seemed to work reasonable in an expected manner. After
using Eclipse for a while I was truly amazed at how much more productive
I had become, and that I could easily push code around in ways I could
have only dreamed of before. I have used Netbeans, Visual Studio, and a
number of other development environments, but I still prefer Eclipse.

I also design and implement Graphical User Interfaces for a living and
once taught University courses in User Interface Design and
Implementation, so I think I have some prerequisites to make a informed
assessment of Access, especially its user interface. I also did my
Masters degree in database theory, but I have to say I'm still
disappointed with the state-of-the-art in many database products,
especially in the area of User Interface implementation. Visual Studio
2005 and .NET 2.0 are showing much promise though, especially in web
applications.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Access is completely without
potential; it starts off to do a good many things with good intentions.
There are a vast number of areas it falls down in, that were I an Access
designer/developer, I would have an immediate solution to fix the
problem. The areas it really falls down in are:

1) So many times when using it I would try something that seemed
reasonable, a natural extension of what I had been doing, only to find
it did not work. Finding a solution was often painful, often
astonishing, and in many cases I still have no idea what the original
problem was. It took me most of the day to try and figure out how to
include a query in the control source of a form component, only to have
to resort to DLookUp and friends because it was clear queries could
indeed not be used in a control source. At least I could find no
evidence from either Google or Microsoft of this having ever been done,
despite Expression Building suggesting it could be done, but never
building a working solution.

2) The diagnostics are incredibly poor. The ubiquitous #Error? and
#Name? results are seldom useful and I often have to resort to Google to
get some hint of the problem or possible solution. Contrast this with
Eclipse which has awesome diagnostics, and usually points out the
solution immediately. Really, how hard would it be to replace #Error?
and #Name? with a meaningful description of the problem? The code knows
what the problem is, why can't it share that insight with the developer?

3) The development environment often gets corrupted. For example, Access
truly believed I had some string stuck in a control source, yet every
time I opened the property editor it showed the string I had entered,
not the one the error message was complaining about. The only solution
was to close Access and restart. Several times I have had to scrap a
form because Access would get so confused about what going on, the only
way was to start again from scratch. In one case I had a problem that
would not go away after restarting Access, but finally went away after I
restarted Windows.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the issue is not "that many people
use Access," but is "why can't Microsoft make a 'better' product with
all the resources they have?"

- EK

 

[Eric Kolotyluk]

You talk in general terms, can you be more specific in what the problems are
or what you find misleading? As others have mentioned using Access
requires a reasonable understanding of the concepts of how databases work in
the real world.

Please see my response to Albert Kallal on a previous thread.

I have used both Access and Word for many years and I have never come across
a need to reboot due to these products.(Even on a MAC). I find both products
quite stable.

Yet I did find a problem that only resolved itself after rebooting Windows.

Didn't Simon Fraser teach you how to postulate an argument? Do you have any
facts to base your personal attacks on the Access Developers or Marketing
executives at Microsoft? You also show a great lack of knowledge about the
history of FoxPro and Access. They are two seperate products and FoxPro was
not morphed into Access. They were seperate products since the beginning and
remain so.

The reason I bounded my original statement with <flame> </flame> was to
indicate I was not attempting to make a rational argument, it was to
express frustration. Any personal attacks were purely symbolic (also
being bounded by <flame> </flame>). True, I have a lack of knowledge
about FoxPro, I was going on information someone else gave me. You have
corrected me, and I apologize to anyone connected to FoxPro.

Personal attacks on Access developers, again wth no basis in fact? Other
than to PCD, your description does not truly represent most of the Access
developers who visit these newsgroups.

Again, please note the earlier <flame> </flame> construct, and see the
response to Albert Kallal on earlier thread. I also would agree that
most Access developers are more tolerant of Access than I am, and I did
give them kudos for "achieving the impossible with [the] incomprehensible."

This is the real world, not the Utopian world of the academic. Word, Access
and the people who use and develop with these products are not perfect.
Rather than strive for 100% perfection, they just get the job done.

John... Visio MVP

Are you telling me that Microsoft cannot improve on Access, or should
not improve on Access, or that we should never try to improve on
anything if it seems to work for most people? Better isn't perfect, it's
just an improvement.

It wasn't too long ago I remember seeing construction workers building
houses with hammers. Now I almost never see them use hammers, they all
seem to have hammer guns.

- EK

 

[John Marshall, MVP]

Please see my response to Albert Kallal on a previous thread.

It is still lacking in detal.

Yet I did find a problem that only resolved itself after rebooting
Windows.

Once case, does not justify the generalization.

The reason I bounded my original statement with <flame> </flame> was to
indicate I was not attempting to make a rational argument, it was to
express frustration. Any personal attacks were purely symbolic (also being
bounded by <flame> </flame>). True, I have a lack of knowledge about
FoxPro, I was going on information someone else gave me. You have
corrected me, and I apologize to anyone connected to FoxPro.

The <flame></flame> does not excuse the generalizations or personal attacks.
I thought
an academic would present better arguments.

Personal attacks on Access developers, again wth no basis in fact? Other
than to PCD, your description does not truly represent most of the Access
developers who visit these newsgroups.

Again, please note the earlier <flame> </flame> construct, and see the
response to Albert Kallal on earlier thread. I also would agree that most
Access developers are more tolerant of Access than I am, and I did give
them kudos for "achieving the impossible with [the] incomprehensible."

Still not appropriate and your response to Albert are still in general terms
and lacking in details.

Are you telling me that Microsoft cannot improve on Access, or should not
improve on Access, or that we should never try to improve on anything if
it seems to work for most people? Better isn't perfect, it's just an
improvement.

Yes, Microsoft can improve their products and are actively doing so. As I
mentioned this is the real
world and their are limits on what can be done in a certain length of time
and within physical limits. Access
can have a perfect UI, but it may end up requiring 50G of storage and 10G of
memory and a processor that
has yet to be designed.

It wasn't too long ago I remember seeing construction workers building
houses with hammers. Now I almost never see them use hammers, they all
seem to have hammer guns.

How long has the hammer been around? The current level of database design
is only decades old and far more
sophisiticated than a hammer. You should have seen the fun we had trying to
create databases when you were a kid.
As for UI, it was very primitive. So things are getting better, but the
limitations of the real world will mean this will be
an ongoing process for sometime.

- EK

John... Visio MVP

 

[Eric Kolotyluk]

It is still lacking in detal.

Interesting. I thought I had given Albert quite a bit of detail. I guess
we'll just have to agree to disagree on what detail is.

Once case, does not justify the generalization.

I wasn't trying to generalize about rebooting Windows, that was an
astonishingly freaky solution to a problem I had. I do seem to have to
restart Access a surprising number of time to fix other problems. If
people had to restart Windows as often as I have to restart Access,
they'd probably switch to Linux (then again, maybe not).

The <flame></flame> does not excuse the generalizations or personal attacks.
I thought
an academic would present better arguments.

Satire is not an attempt to make an argument. I probably should have
used <satire> </satire> instead, but I though more people knew what

Personal attacks on Access developers, again wth no basis in fact? Other
than to PCD, your description does not truly represent most of the Access
developers who visit these newsgroups.

Again, please note the earlier <flame> </flame> construct, and see the
response to Albert Kallal on earlier thread. I also would agree that most
Access developers are more tolerant of Access than I am, and I did give
them kudos for "achieving the impossible with [the] incomprehensible."

Still not appropriate and your response to Albert are still in general terms
and lacking in details.

I'm sorry, but I don't know what you mean by details. I could probably
write a thesis on the problems with Access, but this is just a
news-group discussion. Ask me specific questions and I'll try to give
you specific answers.

Yes, Microsoft can improve their products and are actively doing so. As I
mentioned this is the real
world and their are limits on what can be done in a certain length of time
and within physical limits. Access
can have a perfect UI, but it may end up requiring 50G of storage and 10G of
memory and a processor that
has yet to be designed.

You seem stuck on this "perfect" issue. Have I somehow implied I demand
perfection? If you believe that Access requires 50G of storage and 10G
of memory to be "better" then you are not painting Microsoft in a very
kind light. Sometimes better means just fixing the bugs that are there.

You also seem to be stuck on this "real world" issue. I first used
Access over 10 years ago. How long does it take in the real world to
improve on some basic issues like diagnostics and troubleshooting?

How long has the hammer been around? The current level of database design
is only decades old and far more
sophisiticated than a hammer. You should have seen the fun we had trying to
create databases when you were a kid.
As for UI, it was very primitive. So things are getting better, but the
limitations of the real world will mean this will be
an ongoing process for sometime.


John... Visio MVP

As for UI, there has been an amazing amount of progress in UI over the
last 10 years. Steve Jobs had a nice mantra back in the days of NeXT -
"It just works." That was the bar he set for his developers to jump
over. This should be the goal of all UI designers and implementers. I
was using NeXT before I used Access, so at least someone, somewhere in
the real world knew about good UI then. But my point is, it's been 10
years...

Again this "real world" issue? You do not seem to have any faith that
the real world can develop real improvements, with real resources, in a
real amount of time. One point I'm trying to make is that if people
unquestioningly accept products like Access as they are, then companies
like Microsoft have no incentive to improve upon them. If people aren't
willing to ask for a nail-gun, then they will forever be stuck using a
hammer.

When I (and my colleagues) develop an application, we recognize its
shortcomings, and then strive to do a better job on the next release. If
we kept making excuses about "the real world," and "50 GB disk, 10 GB
memory" requirements, we wouldn't be employed for very long. It's really
amazing the amount of improvement you can make in product with a 6 month
development cycle, a small team of people, and bosses who set the bar high.

- Eric... Real World UI Developer

 

[Eric Kolotyluk]

Ignore John Marshall!! He makes no real contribution to the newsgroup. He is
an embarassment to what MVP is about and is constantly making an A$#@&% of
himself.

I'm curious, what does MVP stand for and what is it about?

Cheers, Eric

 

[Tony Toews]

Ignore John Marshall!! He makes no real contribution to the newsgroup. He is
an embarassment to what MVP is about and is constantly making an A$#@&% of
himself.

Rubbish.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

 

[Tony Toews]

I'm curious, what does MVP stand for and what is it about?

Steve aka PC Datasheet believes in excessive advertising in the
newsgroups. As well as asking questions and then answering them
using alias's recommending his services.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

 

[Albert D.Kallal]

I don't think it's cogent to say that because something is popular or
widely used it is the best, because people often choose things for reasons
other than quality.

I not making any claim as to ms-access being the best in class. However, I
will say that it is likely the most popular desktop IDE for database
applications.

For example, often people choose things because everyone else does and
they may not want to be different than everyone else.

Yes, but also don't see the average user of the product who has your
complaints. I think this issue is critical. It is not that everyone uses the
product, but the fact that average user of the product does not have your
complaints. that to me is a critical issue here.

After using Eclipse for a while I was truly amazed at how much more
productive I had become, and that I could easily push code around in ways I
could have only dreamed of before.

Well, then, do you consider yourself more productive in Eclipse then
ms-access? How do they compare? Can you really throw sql into a control in
Eclipse? (or, do you have to do hand stands...setup a complex connection
object..and THEN use sql, and then hand code the result into the screen? -
sound familiar??).

I also design and implement Graphical User Interfaces for a living and
once taught University courses in User Interface Design and
Implementation,

Great, perhaps you then read my work on this subject. I was the author of
anat-sim, the ideas and concepts were what OMNISIM was based on.

Likely you read about my work. You can read about my work here

http://www.quasar.ualberta.ca/IT/research/Szabo/Bagnall.html

so I think I have some prerequisites to make a informed assessment of
Access, especially its user interface. I also did my Masters degree in
database theory, but I have to say I'm still disappointed with the
state-of-the-art in many database products, especially in the area of User
Interface implementation.

You would do well to keep the concepts of database theory separate from UI,
they are very different. However, I had years of experience with non
relational database systems. You can read one of my articles here

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/fog0000000006.html

It took me most of the day to try and figure out how to include a query in
the control source of a form component, only to have to resort to DLookUp
and friends because it was clear queries could indeed not be used in a
control source.

And, exactly what IDE have you EVER used that allowed sql for source of a
text box control on a form? I can't recall any my self.

The fact that ms-access has dookup is fine in this case. What is the problem
here

=dlookup("field name",. "table or query name", "sql criteria")

The above seems quite straight forward to me? Further, if the value you need
is simply a related value based on a foreign key, then why not base the form
on a sql query that joins in the additional "description" fields? That way,
in forms design mode, you simply drag and drop the field from the field list
onto the form, and you are done. Why go though hoops here, when you can
base the form a on a query that looks up those values from other tables (you
do have to use a left join...but then again, the reason for that left join
should be common sense). It would be only someone who has not sat down and
thought about this problem would complain here. Further, if you need, you
can actually use a sub-form, and use that to display related data. You can
even give that sub-form a full sql string. I explain this here

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/fog0000000005.html

so, in a sense, you actually do have a contorl (a sub-form contorl) that can
take a full sql string anway.

Furhter, both a combo box, and a listbox can also have their data souce set
to a sql string. So, we are now at 3 contorls that can take sql as their
souce. But, as mentieond, never seen any ide that allows sql as the source
for a standard text box.

2) The diagnostics are incredibly poor. The ubiquitous #Error? and #Name?
results are seldom useful and I often have to resort to Google to get some
hint of the problem or possible solution.

There is generally only one reason for the above...and that is the data
source is incorrect. Nothing more needs to be learned here. How informative
is a message telling you that the data source is wrong going to help. What
more information could help here? If you are saying that error trapping and
handling could be better, sure, this is a weak area (but not the #name
issue). Do remember that ms-access is based on VB6..and the syntax is
identical - sans the forms object model. So, the programming langue here is
Vb6, once again, likely the most popular language ever in our industry. This
language did trade ease of use for some restrictions in error handling, but
a reasonable compromise never the less.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the issue is not "that many people use
Access," but is "why can't Microsoft make a 'better' product with all the
resources they have?"

Like I say, it all comes down to the alternatives, and how much better you
think they are. I don't believe the alternatives are better, and perhaps you
do, but I not seen evidence of that product that even rivals ms-access.

 

[Tony Toews]

So, Tony, do you feel John Marshall exemplifies the code of conduct for MVPs
and can be held up as a role model as to what an MVP is?

Of course

and

Absolutely not.

Reply to either or both with your comebacks for whatever reason you
have for asking the question in the first place.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

 

[Eric Kolotyluk]

I not making any claim as to ms-access being the best in class. However, I
will say that it is likely the most popular desktop IDE for database
applications.

I don't doubt it's the most popular IDE for database applications; it's
ubiquitous like several Microsoft applications, which is why I chose to
use it.

Yes, but also don't see the average user of the product who has your
complaints. I think this issue is critical. It is not that everyone uses the
product, but the fact that average user of the product does not have your
complaints. that to me is a critical issue here.

I doubt that the average user of Access would complain about it, but I
wasn't talking about the average user, I was talking about me. I
personally find it lacking in many ways for what I would expect from a
product of this maturity.

Well, then, do you consider yourself more productive in Eclipse then
ms-access? How do they compare? Can you really throw sql into a control in
Eclipse? (or, do you have to do hand stands...setup a complex connection
object..and THEN use sql, and then hand code the result into the screen? -
sound familiar??).

I'm not claiming that Eclipse is a database IDE. You asked "what other
software development product have you used besides ms-access?" I didn't
have another "desktop database IDE" to compare it to. I could have
compared Visual Studio 2005 to Access, but VS is also not a "Desktop"
database IDE of the Access ilk. I did choose Eclipse because it has
virtues that transcend database development, that any IDE should
incorporate, including Access:

1) Intuitive user interface
2) Excellent diagnostics
3) Robust implementation (although it could be a bit better there)

Great, perhaps you then read my work on this subject. I was the author of
anat-sim, the ideas and concepts were what OMNISIM was based on.

Likely you read about my work. You can read about my work here

http://www.quasar.ualberta.ca/IT/research/Szabo/Bagnall.html

I wasn't setting out to compare curricula vitae, I was just trying to
address your concerns "Of course, by Light, this means a person of
reason and experience." I'm not coming at this from the dark.

You would do well to keep the concepts of database theory separate from UI,
they are very different. However, I had years of experience with non
relational database systems. You can read one of my articles here

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/fog0000000006.html

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I believe databases need good
user interfaces, as do database development tools. Of course when
developing database tools, the UI should have a good grounding in
database theory and experience.

And, exactly what IDE have you EVER used that allowed sql for source of a
text box control on a form? I can't recall any my self.

When I was using Expression Builder in Access, it had a queries item in
the left-hand column. I thought I made a reasonable inference that this
meant I could include the result of a predefined query in an expression.
So I build a query which produces a single result and saved it under
queries. Then in expression builder I selected Queries -> myQuery ->
theResult (where theResult is the object of the AS in SQL), and
expression builder inserted a expression in the expression window. The
expression was completely useless of course, so I tried to correct it
(again making reasonable inferences), but was completely unable to find
something that did not produce #Error? or #Name?

To me this seemed like a reasonable way to get a query "result" into an
expression, and the UI seem to imply that this was possible and supported.

The fact that ms-access has dookup is fine in this case. What is the problem
here

=dlookup("field name",. "table or query name", "sql criteria")

The above seems quite straight forward to me? Further, if the value you need
is simply a related value based on a foreign key, then why not base the form
on a sql query that joins in the additional "description" fields? That way,
in forms design mode, you simply drag and drop the field from the field list
onto the form, and you are done. Why go though hoops here, when you can
base the form a on a query that looks up those values from other tables (you
do have to use a left join...but then again, the reason for that left join
should be common sense). It would be only someone who has not sat down and
thought about this problem would complain here. Further, if you need, you
can actually use a sub-form, and use that to display related data. You can
even give that sub-form a full sql string. I explain this here

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Articles/fog0000000005.html

so, in a sense, you actually do have a contorl (a sub-form contorl) that can
take a full sql string anway.

Furhter, both a combo box, and a listbox can also have their data souce set
to a sql string. So, we are now at 3 contorls that can take sql as their
souce. But, as mentieond, never seen any ide that allows sql as the source
for a standard text box.

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that there is something wrong with
DLookUp and friends, there isn't. They work fine. I was complaining
about a feature in Access that was implied by several things I saw in
the UI, in the Northwind database, and other things I had seen in Access
- the ability to include a "query result" in the control source
expression. It took me most of the day before I gave up and had to fall
back on "good old reliable" DLookUp.

There is generally only one reason for the above...and that is the data
source is incorrect. Nothing more needs to be learned here. How informative
is a message telling you that the data source is wrong going to help. What
more information could help here? If you are saying that error trapping and
handling could be better, sure, this is a weak area (but not the #name
issue). Do remember that ms-access is based on VB6..and the syntax is
identical - sans the forms object model. So, the programming langue here is
Vb6, once again, likely the most popular language ever in our industry. This
language did trade ease of use for some restrictions in error handling, but
a reasonable compromise never the less.

The thing I like about Eclipse is not only does it tell you something is
wrong, it usually tells you why something is wrong, and how to fix it
too. I think Access could learn a lesson here with #Error?

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take the bate on VB6.

Like I say, it all comes down to the alternatives, and how much better you
think they are. I don't believe the alternatives are better, and perhaps you
do, but I not seen evidence of that product that even rivals ms-access.

I'm not claiming the alternatives are better, I asking: Why can't
Microsoft do better?

I believe my original question was "How can anyone use this?" and I got
several answers of the form: it takes a lot of hard work and time before
you can get productive. Now I know.

I still believe it is possible to create a product like Access, that is
a far better "desktop (office-like)" database application development
tool that doesn't require such a huge investment in effort up front,
during, and after.

- Eric

 

[Roger Carlson]

I trust you won't be back anytime soon looking for help with your Access
problems. You've chosen a funny way of introducing yourself if you do. I
certainly won't be inclined to answer.

<sarcasm>
Oh, and thank you for the helpful reference defining "sine qua non". Oddly
enough, though, many non-academics know what this means, too.
</sarcasm>

 

[Tony Toews]

Your response does not make sense! You say you feel that John Marshall's
conduct demonstrates what the best of the best MVPs conduct should be like
but then you say that he should not be considered a role model of what an
MVP is.

I was mocking your question.

Are you an MVP? If you are, you should be insulted by the conduct of John
Marshall as his conduct reflects on your integrity as an MVP.

Ah, the statement I was expecting to come. And yes, I have been
recognized by MS as an MVP for a while now.

Please be more specific as to Johns conduct. Groups Google URLs would
be appreciated.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

 

[Tony Toews]

Start by looking at the number of POSITIVE contributions he has made to
microsoft.public.access and comp.databases.ms-access.

If you can't bring specific instances of John's conduct, or lack
thereof, then we have nothing further to discuss.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm