I don't know where you got that statistic from--
the bottom line-- I'm just not positive that you're comparing apples
to apples. I think that you're saying
Access (MDB + ADP) > SQL Server (without ADP)
I actually might agree to your SWAG (scientific wild ass guess).. I
think that ADP are 100 times more prevalent than you guys believe.
The punchline is that it seems like you should be doing the
calculation this way
MDB < (ADP OR SQL Server)
I'm just not positive that there is a study - anywhere in the world-
that shows that MDB is more popular than ADP and _HOW_ much more
popular it is.
Of course that is true. Of course-- SQL -OR- ADP has more people than
MDB.
-It's the most economical database on the market
**
www.microsoft.com/sql - SQL Express is _FREE_ has twice the space
limit.. and 100 times more scalable than MDB / Jet / ACCDB /
SharePoint.. SQL Express is _EASIER_ and more powerful; more scalable;
more reliable- I mean _WOW_.
-It has a long history with a strong support community
** microsoft.public.access
_AND_
** microsoft.public.sqlserver
-Many professional organizations use it every day and depend on it -
** I think that it's obvious to me-- that SQL Server is more popular
than MDB.
I mean; how could you even make this claim? The number of book sales?
LoL
I mean; how could you even make this claim? The number of newsgroup
questions? LoL
Should we add up the # of newsgroup questions about SQL Server vs
Access? I'll gladly do that math with you.
The experiences of a bunch of Access script kids? Is that how you
extrapolate 'Jet has taken over the world (even though it is getting
replaced by SQL Server Compact Edition.. er-- cough-- I mean WinFS!
YAY IT IS HERE!)'
I'm just as egocentric as anyone else on this newsgroup. But I mean--
come on-- just because you read this _WHERE_ does that mean that it is
true?