Access Disdain

  • GoofyGuy,

    and then turn back to IT when those tools go kuhflooey

    Luke Chung of FMSINC.com has written several excellent articles on exactly this topic. I can't find the specific one I'm looking for which gives you a sense of how few Access applications actually rise to the consciousness of IT and why IT should think of them as prototypes instead of vilifying them. But here's on in a similar vein.

    http://www.fmsinc.com/tpapers/budgets/ApplicationDevelopment.html

    In a large IT organization, you have limited resources and you have to allocate them to the projects with priority. Those projects also tend to be the biggest and most risky to develop. But operating groups have constant needs for data and so they turn to the secretary and make her do it or the local power user because they have application knowledge. By removing Access as a tool, you are solving one problem but creating a worse one. You are forcing them to do everything in Excel or even Word. We all know that even though Excel is absolutely amazing, it isn't a database and some tasks simply require a database. You can't believe that the world will actually stand still and wait for a monolithic IT department to complete some huge project or get through its 4 years of backlog to get to a small problem? What are the users to do? They need help now. Not 4 years from now. The Obamacare portal is just the tip of the iceberg. This project that took three years and cost us (you and me) a gazillion dollars (they can't even tell us how much it cost), is a symptom of what is wrong with corporate IT and why I left it 20 years ago. Once I discovered I could get to DB2 data on the mainframe, I was sold. I knew I could actually solve corporate problems with Access without spending years developing COBOL applications.

    So, rather than cutting off the use of Access, why not try to control it? Access apps can be developed for significantly less cost than web or windows client/server apps and they give you an opportunity to build working prototypes. How many businesses have lost out because during the year(s) it took to develop their system, the market moved past them? Once the prototype is working, you have a requirements model, a schema, and form samples that can go a long way toward cutting down your final development time. There is still the problem of allowing the users to build the apps. I say, let them start but give them an internal help desk or funnel them to one of the excellent Access forums where fools like me and George and Armen answer questions for free. If you use it correctly, Access can reduce your development costs. You should also encourage your "real" developers to become familiar with it and use it to support their other tasks. But as long as you and your programmers think Access is somehow "less" than your desired toolset, you will never be able to use it effectively as a RAD platform.

  • Did write a small booking app for an outdoor centre. It has managed bookings to the tune of £250 000 in turnover. Very difficult to justify a budget beyond about 10000 for that. Outside of Access your really not going to get across the start line for small bespoke applications for that kind of budget.

    Talking five users all manual input about 1000 bookings a year.

    cloudydatablog.net

  • As I originally wrote, one has to pick the right tool for the right job. Access is fine for prototyping and for limited-scale applications.

    Since those are the scenarios where Access is fine, why not allow it in your organization for those scenarios? Don't you have those needs too? In most organizations, there are more opportunities for smaller division and department-level applications than for enterprise-wide systems. By trying to eradicate Access, you're missing out on the situations that it is best suited for.

  • GoofyGuy (7/21/2014)


    With sincere respect for Patricia and her twenty years Access experience, we're doing our best to eliminate Access 'apps' from the enterprise production business environment.

    I think that is the main objection to many of the comments here. As Pat points out, most of you don't really understand Access, what it is and what it can do. All you know is that inexperienced Access users often make a mess because they don't know any better. So instead of trying to solve the problem, you ban the tool. That's like banning automobiles because some drivers cause accidents with them.

    Scott<>

  • So, rather than cutting off the use of Access, why not try to control it? Access apps can be developed for significantly less cost than web or windows client/server apps and they give you an opportunity to build working prototypes.

    As I'd mentioned, we do use Access for building working prototypes, and to produce some limited-scope production applications. However, for enterprise-wide applications, we reduce our costs and time-to-market using open source JavaScript frameworks and libraries (Dojo[/url], DHTMLX). The resulting web applications run on any number of different form factors and browsers, consume web services (rather than using direct database connections), and do not require redistribution when code changes are made. We've developed a number of reusable application templates, which cut development time nicely.

    Overall, I feel it's a great improvement upon client-server architecture, and even upon MS' .Net framework. I've managed to stay more or less abreast of progress in application development technology over the last 36 years, and have to say I'm impressed with the JavaScript/HTML5/CSS3 paradigm.

  • Scott (7/21/2014)


    That's like banning automobiles because some drivers cause accidents with them.

    Well, it's more like banning nuclear bombs, because even one of them can really mess up your day.

    Seriously, though, we've banned Access development by non-IT staff, and limited its use of Access to prototyping and smaller-scale applications. That doesn't sound too extreme, and yes, we know what we're doing here (on most days).

  • Sorry Goofy, but I have to disagree with the overall preference with your company. I believe a local power user and/or IT resource to allow for business developed small applications are actually more profitable for a company in the long term, even though you keep additional 'occassional' manpower on hand for those processes.

    And to those who are being particular, I'm talking about JET and the VBA forms/reports engines, which is what most folks refer to when they say MS Access. Otherwise they're usually called Access Projects, at least in most places I frequent. Admittedly, we're using relatively imprecise wording when we do that.

    The reason I want a central resource is to make sure users don't avoid compliance software that exists but is a PITA for reasons they don't want to care about. SOX gets cranky. However, smaller department-wide software doesn't need a full bore IT expert solution. It needs to be stored somewhere that the network does nightly backups, it needs to do what they need to do their jobs, and it needs to be maintainable. If the department expands and needs a back end with better concurrency, that can be worked into a project. As mentioned, the thing is already prototyped for a full solution at that point. Users are familiar with the data *intimately*, rather than telling me it's the 5th field down on the second screen through some link I have no idea about.

    MS Access brings a lot of power to companies, as long as it's not abused, and not developed in a glass cone of silence. Now, if you can't bring your users to heel on the subject, then yes, I could see a blanket rule going into effect while you bring in experts and trainers. It's obvious a company like that needs the nimbleness if you've got a problem that rampant, they should address it, not take it out behind the shed with Ol' Yeller.


    - Craig Farrell

    Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.

    For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
    For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]

    Twitter: @AnyWayDBA

  • Evil Kraig F wrote:

    MS Access brings a lot of power to companies, as long as it's not abused, and not developed in a glass cone of silence. Now, if you can't bring your users to heel on the subject, then yes, I could see a blanket rule going into effect while you bring in experts and trainers.

    That's pretty much been the problem. We (IT) do use Access for a few reasons, as I'd mentioned, but we've had precious little luck preventing the creation of Access monstrosities elsewhere in the organisation.

    Benign neglect of those nasties has generally been the solution. It seems to work. Sure, we'd like to 'empower end users', but they're powerfully bad at application and database design.

  • called Access Projects, at least in most places I frequent

    The .adp, which was a limited version of the .mdb that could connect ONLY to SQL Server never gained popularity and attracted a limited user base mainly because an "Access" application that can't even link to "Access" tables isn't really "Access" at all, has been deprecated. I think A2010 is the last version that will run them. Linking directly to SQL Server produces similar results with significantly less work.

  • A good spirited debate! Access pro's, can I challenge you to write something for SSC that shows the power of Access? Top 10 Access mistakes? Deployment model and source control?

    Also, I'm unclear on the current state of Access development - do you feel the product is moving forward, or is it stalled? Is Lightswitch (or something else) beckoning you (or the newbies who might try Access)?

  • Andy Warren (7/22/2014)


    A good spirited debate! Access pro's, can I challenge you to write something for SSC that shows the power of Access? Top 10 Access mistakes? Deployment model and source control?

    Also, I'm unclear on the current state of Access development - do you feel the product is moving forward, or is it stalled? Is Lightswitch (or something else) beckoning you (or the newbies who might try Access)?

    At least in my observable universe, MS Access and SQL Server are typically used in tandem. I personally only use Access on an occasional and limited basis, but many data analysts, executive power users, and operational staff connect to SQL Server via linked tables or views, create ad-hoc reports and charts, sometimes staging datasets to local Access tables. Maybe SSRS would be a better choice, but that would require an enterprise license and training. In some cases I've seen Access used as the tool for maintaining meta-data (lookups and configuration) in SQL Server. If an organization needs a general purpose tool for ad-hoc operational or BI reporting, with the ability to persist data locally, and that's also inexpensive and easy to learn, then Access is a good solution. It's a tool for empowering users without involving an application developer or DBA (assuming the organization genuinely needs their users empowered in that way). However, in recent years, Excel PowerPivot and PowerView leaps ahead of Access in this arena.

    That said, today in 2014 (and ever since the mid-1990's), there are much better options than MS Access if you're looking for a platform to develope multi-user line of business applications or data marts. In that arena, Access struggles and fails.

    "Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho

  • Also, I'm unclear on the current state of Access development - do you feel the product is moving forward

    Although I remain a big fan of Access development if its niche is properly understood, I think the product took a huge step backwards when it changed the security system that it had. It was very nice to be able to develop applications that displayed information, forms and reports in a user security context. I don't understand exactly what's replaced it. I only know if I use Access with Jet, the application objects are now come one come all

  • Eric M Russell (7/22/2014)


    Andy Warren (7/22/2014)


    That said, today in 2014 (and ever since the mid-1990's), there are much better options than MS Access if you're looking for a platform to develope multi-user line of business applications or data marts. In that arena, Access struggles and fails.

    I'm interested in hearing these alternatives.

  • Eric M Russell wrote:

    Maybe SSRS would be a better choice, but that would require an enterprise license and training ...

    We use SSRS a great deal. I was under the impression it's 'free' - i.e., bundled with SQL Server. Even SQL Server Express comes with SSRS, if I'm not mistaken.

    (But not 100% sure. I'm not on the licencing/bean counting end of things here. I'm just the application development manager.)

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 113 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply