My issues with Access 12 Beta

B

boe

WOW - I have to say WOW. I read PC Magazines review of Office 12 beta and
have to wonder if the person was held prisoner until they wrote a nice
review or if they were being blackmailed.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1888060,00.asp PC MAG claims Office 12
is the biggest change to Office in 10 years! I would be embarrassed to
write such a boot-licking review if I were that writer. I thought a
reports job was to be objective. Instead of just going on about how
wonderful it is, why not point out some of the major flaws in it as well.
Since PC Mag went on about the good stuff - I'll let you know a few of my
major concerns about the version 12 release so you have some balance.
Please do read their review as they do highlight the good things you might
be waiting for in the next version of Office.



OK - they changed to toolbar - it is now even MORE mac like than before -
OOOH - AHHH. If I was that hung up on a MAC interface I'd just by a MAC -
please get over it MS - it isn't everything - there is more to improving
your products (office and windows) than just making them look like MACs!! I
don't consider a mac toolbar a big change. I had little problem navigating
it so it isn't a bad toolbar layout so I'm not complaining that it is bad -
just not what people who actually have more than a kindergarten education
need MS to focus on. We need Office to be more FUNCTIONAL - prettier
doesn't justify an upgrade in a corporate environment. You want our money
MS - than make it worth it for us to upgrade! Does it really need to be
THAT much more intuitive that you spend so much time on that menu bar?
Anyone who has used a product for a day pretty much knows 80% of all the
functions they will use and after a week you probably are at 90%. So why
not focuts on giving those of us who have actually used a computer for more
than a week the functions we have been needing for YEARS!



MS doesn't seem to really want to hear what is wrong with their product as
the click here to provide feedback button is not functioning!





Before anyone gets all concerned that I'm bashing a Beta vs. a final
release - relax, I'm not going on about how it is slow or hung many times or
things like that because I'm expecting issues like that in a beta. It is
CORE features that are missing that I'm concerned about. If I thought MS
had even thought about these missing key features I wouldn't be writing
this. But as the article says it is the biggest change in 10 years - so
let's give those developers some things to think about.







Here are the issues as I see them.



They haven't improved the two biggest gimped applications in Office -
Outlook and Access.



1 Access - still can't use JPGs effectively - they are a package - in Office
12 you had Photo Editor so JPGs showed up in reports/forms. So what does MS
think we are LESS likely to have databases with pictures 5 years later? If
you want to bring databases to the average user think about what they would
have in it. Even contacts in Outlook has pictures! Contacts are a
database. Your default database is for an inventory - don't you think most
companies would start to consider pictures essential in a database? When
you shop on line - do you ever buy anything without a PICTURE? Isn't it
sad that previoius versions of Office - pre2003 had no issue with pictures
but the newer ones can't handle them



2 Databases with JPGs still absurdly large. The jpgs by themselves are only
about 2MB but with all the white space in Access, they take up 600MB!!!!



3 I saw no way to convert my database - save as, export etc so I could save
it to a 2006 format. Not sure if I could if that would help with JPGs.
Frankly I couldn't figure out how to create a table with pictures from
scratch in the new version! I didn't see a way of creating any field type -
e.g. currency, date, etc. I could select templates - e.g. begin, current
value etc - but not just add any type as before.



Outlook. I'd love to tell you about Outlook but it always came up out of
resources!! I have 1 GIG of RAM - 100 GIG FREE on my hard drive and a P4
2.8 and a 256MB video card. I'm hoping MS doesn't think that isn't
sufficient for opening mail! I ended up creating a new profile and I was
able to get into e-mail.



1 MS keeps on talking about improving SEARCHING technology. Guess what
people do A LOT of in Outlook - SERCHING. So when I search more than one
folder, I want to see both the TO and the FROM folder - because if I am
searching MY mailbox it is always FROM me, and if I'm searching my sent
folder as well as my inbox, I need to know who it went TO.



2 When is outlook actually going to EXIT completely when you close it or
click on exit. It is the most tenacious program I've ever seen. If you
need to flip between outlook profiles it is essential to have Outlook
actually stop all processes. Which leads to my third point.



3 Let us open more than one outlook profile at the same time. Let's face it
how many people have at least 3 e-mail accounts - their personal, business
and their register/buy products account where they don't care about getting
on a spam list. I have 2 business accounts that I keep in one profile and
three personal accounts I keep in a separate profile. Switching between the
two is unpleasant but I would never want the two profiles combined.



4 I don't see an import function for Goldmine. I realize that isn't a
function too many people will want but it would be nice.





Business Contact Manager.



BCM is such a simple thing for them to improve upon. If they just synched
the basic contact data with a normal exchange account contacts so you could
access the data via OWA and sync it with your pocketpc/WM5 device the
product would offer something head and shoulders above Saleslogix, Act,
Goldmine etc. It probably would take a programmer about 1 day to develop it
and test it. Supposedly BCM is for Small Businesses and yet so is Small
Business Server if I'm not mistaken. So why not give the SBS people the
contact management feature they need?
 
B

Brendan Reynolds

To any Beta testers who might be considering responding here - please
remember that if you are a Beta tester, you signed a non-disclosure
agreement, and writing about the Beta in this public newsgroup is a
violation of that agreement.
 
A

Arvin Meyer [MVP]

I haven't read the PC Magazine review, but I have been a beta tester for
almost 10 years now, and I will have to agree that the changes in Office 12
are the most radical that I've seen since I've started beta testing. If the
features implemented thus far make it to final release, this will be a
compelling upgrade. I personally feel that it is worth buying a new machine
for, and have already done so, just for the testing.

As Brendan said, you have violated your NDA and specific comments are
inappropriate. There are plenty of new features in Access and Office 12 that
are exciting and useful to both developers and to end users. Once Office 12
is released, this might be as good a place as any to discuss the ones which
pertain to databases and to Access. This will never be the place to discuss
those issues and features which belong to Outlook or any of the other Office
applications.
--
Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP
Microsoft Access
Free Access downloads
http://www.datastrat.com
http://www.mvps.org/access
 
C

Craig Alexander Morrison

I haven't read the PC Magazine review, but I have been a beta tester for
almost 10 years now, and I will have to agree that the changes in Office
12

Ahh! You missed Access 95 then, that was an education I can tell you. (vbg)

Having not been an MS Beta Tester (or rather not an NDA signatory) for
nearly ten years life is so much better.

It may be that they have finally added something useful, whether it lasts is
another matter. Does anybody remember ADO, ADP, DAP..... (vbg)

IMO Access 97 was pretty near damned perfect for my development needs. We
use Access 2003(SP2) for all new developments but it was a marginal
decision.

Most of Access 12 is corporate and end user (and corporate end user) and so
will have its uses but I expect some of our clients will stick with Access
97 based systems until they are no longer able to run them on some future
version of windows. We have supplied most of our clients the Access 2003
version of their software including the Runtime. Those that even bothered to
look at it said it was slower and were happy to stick with 97.

I suspect that any developer (non-corporate) who is wise would acquire as
many Office 2003 and VSTO licences as they think they might need for the
next 10 years. Especially if they do not already own the classic version. I
am beginning to wonder if a legitimate copy of MS ODE97 will be worth more
than a MB 350SL (gullwing) sometime in the future. :)

Access 12 is interesting but so was Access 95 and Access 2000. It wasn't
until they fixed them that it was worth deploying to clients. Access 12 will
be RTM'd to coincide with Vista whether it is ready or not, that is the
lesson I take from history.

I won't blame the Access Team for this, it wasn't their fault with Access 95
and Access 2000 and probably won't be their fault with this one either.

The next version Office 13 (or 14, for the superstitious) may be more solid.

I could be wrong, I hope I am. If it is not ready, Microsoft, please this
time listen do not release it until it is at least as strong and reliable as
Access 97. Wasted effort on my part, I suspect, but then I am no longer
personally involved so won't take it as personal disappointment when 12
crashes onto the desktop next year with a dull thud. I'll be getting it just
in case they pull it off, but I would be very surprised if it is not yet
another disappointment.

BTW A big thanks go to Stephen Lebans for the PDF functionality he has just
added to Access 97 thru to 2003. ReportToPDF works a treat (notwithstanding
a few image related niggles relating to snapshots).

Check out http://www.lebans.com/reporttopdf.htm if you are interested.

Another reason not to bother with Access 12 (wg)

BTW And don't answer this (g) but aren't the two most hated features by
developers the basis of the new "enhanced user experience with forms and
reports"? Lookup fields and Sub datasheets!

Good luck and keep up the testing, and make sure you report EVERY little
problem and niggle.

--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison
Crawbridge Data (Scotland) Limited

news:[email protected]...
 
C

Craig Alexander Morrison

Well let's hope he doesn't have to pay as much as MS had to pay for their
violation of the JDA they had with IBM. ;-)
 
B

boe

So you don't have any issue with the fact it doesn't handle jpgs? I guess
as long as the only type of database you create is a phonebook access is
fine. I guess if you wanted anything more functional you should use MySQL
or Oracle. Too bad MS doesn't want the small time user to be able to
easily catalogue their assets, inventory, collections, employees... without
hiring a developer.
 
L

Larry Linson

Craig Alexander Morrison said:
I suspect that any developer (non-corporate) who is wise would acquire as
many Office 2003 and VSTO licences as they think they might need for the
next 10 years. Especially if they do not already own the classic version. I
am beginning to wonder if a legitimate copy of MS ODE97 will be worth more
than a MB 350SL (gullwing) sometime in the future. :)

An acquaintance bought a copy of Office 97 Developer Edition on eBay a few
years back, and, until this good day, he hasn't told me how much he had to
pay, only, "You really don't want to know." But, at the same time, there was
a vendor at local computer sales who had a large supply of full, retail
(apparently genuine - hologram logo and all) Office 97 Pro that he was
selling for $50.

If I ever again get to the Third Saturday sale, it will be interesting to
see if he still has some copies, and whether the price has gone up.

Larry
 
L

Larry Linson

So you don't have any issue with the fact
it doesn't handle jpgs?

Previous versions have required the Graphics Filters, which come as part of
Office or standalone Word, but not standalone Access, to "handle jpgs". If
that is a lack, I suspect Stephen Lebans' control will handle it, or will be
updated to work with Office 12 and will handle it.
Too bad MS doesn't want the small time user to be able to
easily catalogue their assets, inventory, collections, employees... without
hiring a developer.

I'd think what you describe are templates, and templates are unlikely to be
released in early Betas.

But, just FYI, Access capabilities as a development tool have long been
added to its appeal in the marketplace. Yet, it still ranks very well in
comparative reviews I have read, for ease of use.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP
 
A

aaron.kempf

you guys are a bunch of flaming wimps

screw NDA

speak the truth in a public forum

MS needs to stop horsing around; and start allowing people to
communicate.

Microsoft should open up their whole bug database -- new products and
beta products-- be more forthcoming.. that way.. when we have bugs that
we've wanted fixed for 10 years-- we can SEEE that we've been asking
for a bug fix for 10 years.

as it is; microsoft is incapable of releasing FUNCTIONAL software that
is for the most part free of bugs.

other companies do it-- DREAMWEAVER is an example of a badass product.

but MS doesn't care and isn't willing to do whatever necessary to start
creating QUALITY SOFTWARE.

your NDA are bullshit microsoft i'll be damned if i wont talk about
this Office 12 shit whenever i damn well please
 
8

85ascMcLaren

I think as far as some of the capabilities go - you need to look at this also
from a political point of view. How good can access get before it becomes
too good to sell sql server. I have seen MANY times within the government -
jobs that could have been done using INEXPENSIVE tools like access, but used
oracle or SQL server for just a FEW people. And the data was NOT mission
critical. It was a political issue to make the project look bigger than it
actually was. Access is a very good and free/cheap alternative to save
thousands of dollars over the other three and four solutions of products that
one must purchase and acquire licenses for. And in today's world, the
government is worried about money since the war and NMCI took all of it....
Just another point of view.
Jason
 
A

aaron.kempf

wow

i think that you're crazy

and MDB needs and SQL Server are COMPLEMENTARY

they help each other

MDB is a scratchpad; and SQL Server is a repository
don't use MDB for storing data; in the real world-- for anything.

MSDE is the same price.

two different tiers

MDB isn't a backend.. it's just not a viable option for real-world use
for anything.. it should be lined up against Crsytal Reports and Oracle
Forms..

but MS hasn't ever spent a single dollar marketing Access-- i just
think that they're a bunch of drunk buffoons that need to go back to
the drawing board
and stop making excuses

I am fed up with MS trying to sell us on FEATURES they need to start
FIXING BUGS NOT MAKING CHANGES.

start fixing bugs assholes instead of selling us a new version

-aaron
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top