.... and is really pleased with the result.

So far, I continue using A2010 using he old formats because I don't
see any benefit of using Sharepoint, just additional steps that I
don't need. It would be a different story if I had to exchange data
over the web, but I don't see it for our company and we already use
Remote Desktop massively.

I'd like to hear experiences, positive or negative, because deploying
Sharepoint is tough sell to me - and it has not-negligible costs and
requires more resources.

"Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkallal (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote in
news:8Wbap.11592$mE7.6371 (AT) newsfe08 (DOT) iad:

Er, for an office of 3 or 4 employees, why would anybody PURCHASE
SQL Server, as upposed to simply using SQL Server Express?

Also, you're talking about hosted services, and I can't convince my
clients that it's safe to have their data in the cloud (I don't
believe it myself, actually).

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

"Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkallal (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote in
news:8Wbap.11592$mE7.6371 (AT) newsfe08 (DOT) iad:

I think the cloud is going to play a role, but not as primary data
store. I can't even get some of my clients to consider using
cloud-based services for BACKUPS, let alone for anything else!

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

?"David-W-Fenton" wrote in message
news:Xns9E99E9DAA6F5Ef99a49ed1d0c49c5bbb2 (AT) 74 (DOT) 209.136.81...

Well, in fact I was also just talking about purchasing a server. You might
not even want sql server or need it. So, I was more pointing out that in
regards to sql server, they might not need it, but they ALSO do not even
need to purchase and setup a server either.

I done some work from some new startups in a business incubator. They now
have a second person but have no money or desire to setup and install some
file server for both people to use. And, with Google docs etc, they can
share documents and files anyway, and they can do so when they walk out the
door with their laptops. And they not in the office a whole lot of the time
anyway.

And, with my reservation software, they can install it on their two
computers and instantly they are sharing the same back end, and are doing so
because I hosting the sql server data part for them. They are tight for
money, and not having to purchase a server or another computer to run my
application is a real nice selling point. And even better is they can go out
of the office and still use the application as long as they have internet.
So, they are multi user and connected at all times in and out of the office.

For the most part I agree. However, those just starting out already have
tons of stuff on ebay and tons of documents and stuff on Google docs. They
have a hard time understanding why they need to go out and purchase a
computer for their office that just sits there to share a few files. They
don't see the point and all that box does is cost expensive service calls
for some guy to come in and install software. Then the guy tells them they
also need to purchase some type tape or external hard drive backup system.
They the guy comes in and says they need virus software, and then the guy
comes in and this just goes on and on. Who is going to pay for all of that?
As I noted, for some of these people they even have difficulty understanding
why they should even bother with that server.

As I said, this is a often low cost issue, but often it also an issue of how
easy the connectivity and how easy the new systems can get them up and
running to share data. And more important, it often that they don't have to
pick up the phone and start spending money to EVEN JUST talk to someone
about how to get some computer stuff done.

They simply do not care about computers. If someone gives them free office
or free document sharing with a few mouse clicks, then a big portion of
users will go down this road because this is the path of least resistance
and least hassle. They will spend money, but only when they have to. As I
said, this is often why Access is a choice for these smaller business
anyway.

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
Pleasenospam_kallal (AT) msn (DOT) com

The budget estimates we got to implement Sharepoint are insane. I
don't see much interest from an Access perspective or even general
developpers, but I might be wrong.

I really like the idea of SQL Server Express 2008. I tried MSDE a
few years ago but dismissed it. It now has a capacity of 10Gb and
more visual tools.... I'll certainly revisit it.

I wonder about speed.... is anybody aware if dealing with a SQL db on
a server is *really faster*? I have no complaint with ACC2010 with
recent hardware. I haven't seen much comparo except this one;
http://blog.nkadesign.com/2009/acces...-stats-part-1/

Do I understand that Access is quicker to insert 1000000 records?

"Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkallal (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote in
news:l2Pap.20585$YL7.2652 (AT) newsfe03 (DOT) iad:

These people are clearly idiots and badly in need of education. I'd
be happy to help them learn, but I'd fire them as clients if they
refused to be educated.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

"saintor1 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com" <saintor1 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in
news:02432093-4e7e-4ea1-923c-bca0c2ac1005 (AT) p12g2000vbo (DOT) googlegroups.co
m:

I'm using it at one site -- upsized last September, and the new
native ODBC client vastly improved performance for them (over an MDB
back end). I had never seen anything like that in any previous
upsizing project.

But I do worry about the 1GB memory limitation. This seems like it
would mean that you can really only run relatively small databases
on it.

This is a question that cannot be answered in the absence of
specifics about the environment, the data schema and the
application.

My experience is that upsizing to SQL Server speeds up some things,
badly bogs down certain others and has no effect on most parts of an
app.

In short, there is no magic bullet.

And performance is usually the least reason to upsize, because most
performance problems are going to be due to bad design, rather than
to performance of the datebase engine.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

?"David-W-Fenton" wrote in message
news:Xns9E9BD7102EF1Af99a49ed1d0c49c5bbb2 (AT) 74 (DOT) 209.136.91...

I have to much agree, but those web based email systems are becoming better
and better all the time. With the new web standards, they are even going to
get better.

I mean, just look at how popular Gmail etc. is. They are now taking those
users and offering them more and more features. So, throw in web calendars,
file sharing, document sharing and editing, and users become quite happy.

I really do like Outlook and use it all day long. However, with my win 7
phone, I would say half of my emails in a day are now read + deleted on my
phone. And, between phones and web, this means that for so many these days
the web based email systems are more then enough for most users during the
day. (so less overall time is now spent by me in Outlook, and thus it
becomes that much less valuable).

Again, this is the same old story just like we have for Access. No special
server or special setup needed. The low cost of running + using Access is
why Access is so popular. Now talk to some .net folks and sql server folks
and they state that we are the ones that need some education and are need of
learning what a real database or server is.

Unfortunately, those silly consumers do not listen to us IT folk much
anymore. These new consumers are the ones now going off to work or starting
new business.

In fact, for the first time in our industry, many of the trends in IT are
now being driving by consumers. Just look at how many companies are being
forced to adopt + deal with the iPhone, or even users all of a sudden asking
how they can use their iPad tablets at work. So, many trends in our IT
industry are now driven by users, and not necessary what the traditional IT
vendors and people like me recommend to these people.

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
Pleasenospam_kallal (AT) msn (DOT) com

?"David-W-Fenton" wrote in message
news:Xns9E9DE519CC5BCf99a49ed1d0c49c5bbb2 (AT) 74 (DOT) 209.136.95...

Ok, I expand on this.

The difference here I speak of is a fundamental basic change in our
industry.
Today, much of the change in our IT industry is being driven by consumers
who are using technology OUTSIDE of the work place.

So change we see today is occurring at the consumer level (not at the
workplace or office level)

In a traditional computer environment it would be the Accountant, or IT
department or developers that made most decisions as to what kind of
technology is going to be adopted within an organization. The general work
force was NOT using computers outside of the work place. Computers were for
work.

15 years ago when I walked into a computer store there was few consumers or
people buying computers. In other words, back then you were using computer
for Accounting, or work.

Joe consumer was not walking into that store.

So the general population (consumers) were not purchasing computers back
then. Today, grandparents, mothers children, virtually everyone is now using
computers.

And HOW they use computers OUTSIDE of work is now spilling into the work
force.

So, when I say consumers are a huge driving force today, it simply now that
they are all on the internet and they all are adopting technology. The
result is now those people take these consumer trends (such as iPhone or
Facebook or Gmail) and bring that stuff to work. So now it is the rank and
file and general employees that are demanding that things work with their
iPhone or iPad or whatever. And when they need to organize an event or
meeting, they use Facebook.

So the key point in this concept is that change in our industry is being
driven by consumer trends outside of the workplace.
This changes are thus coming from outside of the traditional IT industry.

It was never the business community or IT workforce that was purchasing all
those iPhones or Facebook, but now so many companies are having to deal with
these new trends, especially when they all show up with iPhones at work and
are organizing meetings and company events with social media sites.

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
Pleasenospam_kallal (AT) msn (DOT) com

"Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkallal (AT) msn (DOT) com> wrote

When I walked into a computer store, looking for my first personal computer
(that would have been 1977 or 1978), _everyone_ looking at and buying
computers were individuals or consumers. I spent my workday working with
mainframes in the business world, but the people buying TRS-80s and Apple
IIs were individuals, consumers, and hobbyists.

Near the customer location where I worked most of the time, there was a
little "mom and pop shop" that sold Apple IIs, and a Radio Shack store with
TRS-80 Model I, Level I and II. By the time I purchased my TRS 80, Model I,
Level II, in 1979, the mom-and-pop-Apple-shop had gone out of business.

I'd hoped to be able to rig that TRS-80 up with a modem (probably at a
blinding-fast 300 or 600 bits per second) to use as a remote terminal to
access our customer's mainframe, but they were very security-conscious and
wouldn't let _anyone_ dial in. They gathered busines data from member
institutions, but they dialed _out_ to call those members (from a
minicomputer: first a DEC PDP and later, an IBM Series I)

In the area within lunchtime walking distance of my office in San Francisco,
there were several shops, in one of which I saw one of the original Apple
I's, with a big round display in a cabinet that looked, for all the world,
like an old tabletop early-model television.

A little later, when Radio Shack brought out its Model II, which they
intended to be a business machine, you saw a _few_ more businesspeople, but
the bulk of the lookers and buyers were still "Joe Consumers".

The business community did not start using personal computers until IBM
brought out their PC (1981-1982) and "legitimized" the genre... and they did
not _really_ start using them in business until some successful IBM PC
clones became available.

Larry