Talk:Microsoft Access/Archive 1

Archive 1

New Logo

http://www.microsoft.com/office/2010/en/download-office-professional-plus/default.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tallen557 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

COMBINE THIS ARTICLE Microsoft_access with article Microsoft_Access?

FOLDOC article:Microsoft Access
1. <database> A relational database running under Microsoft Windows. Data is stored as a number of "tables", e.g. "Stock". Each table consists of a number of "records" (e.g. for different items) and each record contains a number of "fields", e.g. "Product code", "Supplier", "Quantity in stock". Access allows the user to create "forms" and "reports". A form shows one record in a user-designed format and allows the user to step through records one at a time. A report shows selected records in a user-designed format, possibly grouped into sections with different kinds of total (including sum, minimum, maximum, average).
There are also facilities to use links ("joins") between tables which share a common field and to filter records according to certain criteria or search for particular field values.
Version: 2 (date?).
Usenet newsgroup: comp.databases.ms-access.

---

What kind of licensing is needed to be able to use the Microsoft Access product and distribute the applications? In other words, what version of Microsoft Access does a developer need to buy in order to allow distribution of the runtime components without incurring any additional license fees per installation of the runtime? Bevo 22:56, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

As a developer you should have MS Access licenses, to distribute you can use the MS Access runtime libraries free of charge (within the limitations of the MS license). Wiki benguin 22:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Wiki_benguin

Lost link: The mvps link about access is dead... 404... :( Pfortuny 18:04, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

second rebuttal

I agree wholeheartedly with Tony. We have built a number of software products for Fortune 500 companies using MS Access. We have worked with Honeywell and they use MS Access to build software front ends to either Jet 4.0, SQL Server or Oracle backends data table schemas... As do a lot of large companies that want very creative flexible software applications that they cannot buy off the shelf...since most will not fit or do exactly what they want...

MS Access is extrememly powerful in what it can accomplish as a front end software programming toolkit (its also nice that MS Access also gives away a small but powerful database engine too... Jet 4.0... in its tools too)... support@enflow.com

third rebuttal

I run an international multiuser access database for Boeing with nearly 300 users with a SQL backend. It is stable, powerful, cheap to maintain and I have never been asked to do something that hasn't been possible in Access. It is VB for databases and the development environment is second to none, in my opinion as a ten year developer accross access, VB and equinox.

Though jet is rubbish when operated off a file server, but that is generally more to do with the network than access. I have run 50 user databases off a file server with very little down time. Access is superb. It gets a bad rap from snobby developers who simply dont know the power of VBA and ADP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.33.69 (talk) 17:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

un-rebuttal

Whilst Access has some lovely little wizards for quick deployment, these prove to be very limiting when a client starts making demands beyond the simple .... and the jet database is only adequate for small numbers of people. It's a great stepping stone, but it really isn't scalable.

Once a coder learns how to use a tool like visual studio, .net, even swing or whatever, Access becomes an inefficient tool to knock out a solution.

I think the biggest problem is actually not at all a problem with Access, its the fact it is so accessible (no pun intended) and such a shallow learning curve. I'm frequently asked to 'fix' Access databases where the problem is that a person with little understanding of data, normalisation, best practise for documentation and methodology, etc can knock up a half-working system in an evening. Operative word being "half"

I shouldn't complain, fixing these badly conceived and poorly developed atrocities has given me a living for the last decade. I'm just left with the nagging feeling I should have been doing something more productive, not that it hasn't been lucrative. Wiki benguin 22:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Wiki_Benguin

I would have to agree. I think the comment about skilled software developers using MS Access to develop application software is probably a tad misleading. In my opinion MS Access is a business programming tool, not a tool for IT professionals. When I worked in an IT department of a FTSE50 company we wouldn't touch MS Access with a bargepole. The business were free to get themselves into a right fankle using MS Access and Excel to cobble things together if they so desired, but if they asked us for a real business critical system then it would be built in something far more robust and (most importantly) maintainable than MS Access. We did have an MS Access system, built on the cheap by a contractor a number of years ago for a task only done twice a year. We couldn't make head nor tail of it and were in a position that if anything needed to be changed, or it went wrong (which it often did) we were in the situation where we had to spent days trying to fathom what the hell was wrong. Remember, it probably only took a couple of days to write in the first place! It almost came down to doing an emergency rewrite (in a more sensible system, obviously) at one point but we managed to find a backup and start again. Compare that with our core systems that might have been written decades ago but could be maintained and changed reasonably easily. Yes, you can build something quickly in Access, but the pain (and expense) will be felt by your successors in years to come. As for the sense of providing a relational database system for just anyone to play with, well I am sure anyone who even knows what a relational database is will know what you are likely to get!Ewan carmichael (talk) 00:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it comes down to what database products are available to non-professional developers. Access offers the ability for end users to do some database work and these are people who would never ever learn Java or .NET. Trying to compare Access to more programmer centric solutions is irrelevent because it's not an option for the vast majority of Office users. Many people take the samples templates in Access and build on that. For them, this is fine and a much better solution than using Excel, which we can probably all agree is the most popular database, even though it isn't one. From our experience, we've seen very nice applications built in Access by people who know it. We've also seen many crappy ones but that holds true for Excel, along with awful Oracle, SQL Server, .NET and Java solutions. Bad application development processes are really quite independent of the technology. People build things quick and dirty; they try to get the job done today, and very few think about the long term implications. That applies to software development as well as buying subprime mortgages. A more valid comparison would be to compare Access to FileMaker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DataAnalyzer (talk • contribs) 18:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I definitely agree that this is misleading. One of the biggest problems with Access is the lack of triggers/stored procedures in Jet, coupled with VBA. This trains newbies to keep the business logic seperate from the RDBMS portion. This causes serious scalability problems, as integrating extra interfaces (e.g. a web server) means re-implementing the business logic. In my experience, this is the main reason why "skilled software developers" steer clear. SquelloSquirrel (talk) 21:06, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

SquelloSquirrel: - you failing to distingush between the data engine,and access...

MySql for many years did not ship with referential integrity nor did it have stored procedures, and yet you don't see people saying don't use MySql because it lacked stored procedures. However, access 2010 and the ACE engine now has triggers and stored procedures, so now you have to in public state that this data engine is an fantastic product since your BIG reason for avoiding access now disappeared.

In fact, while we at this, it not access that has the stored procedures, it will be the data engine such as ACE (the new jet), or MySql, or sql-server that has the stored procedures.

So, choosing access still requites you to choose a data engine. Just like a web developer chooses some web development tool, they then can choose the data engine. I fail to see how this is ANY different with regards to ms-access. In fact failing to distinguish between a development front end product like ms-access and that of a data engine like JET/ACE or sql server is silly (in fact, it quite ignorant of the people here). If you can't tell the difference, then why are you commenting on access then? Seems to me you talking about JET (which is now called ACE). You can well use ms-access to develop applications and you don't have to choose ACE/JET as you database here. So, here are some big points for ya:

1) access is not the database. It is important to distinguish between development products like ms-access and that of a database engine like MySql or ACE.

2) The ACE data engine supports table triggers and stored procedures for access 2010 (so you are now happy!)

3) You can build web sites with ms-access, and the results run in any stanardard browser. No activeX or silverlight is required. I have tested the results running on unbuntu Linux + firefox.

Here is an video of access 2010, and at the half way point I switch over to running the same application in a browser:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AU4mH0jPntI

Lets all step up our game here, and try to distinguish between JET (ACE), which by the way for 2010 has triggers and stored procedures and that of a development product like access which lets you create a front end (the UI part) to that database system. As mentioned, for access 2010, that front end access builds can be 100% web based. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albert Kallal (talk • contribs) 03:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ease of Use?

This is claimed a few times in this article, though at one place the comment is made that "ease of use can be misleading". I have worked with computers for years and there is nothing "easy" about using Microsoft Access. I know several other people in the same boat. A secretary where I used to work had problems with it; she even went to a class and still had trouble with it. I have a book on Access, it, too, says Access is not an easy program to use. So far, the only Access file I have "sucessfully" created, was nothing more than a list of CDs I own, and I could have done that much more easily on Word! My point with this ranting? Is it correct POV to state the program is easy, when many people routinely avoid it because of its complexity?

--Rt66lt, August 22, 2005

In comparison to larger, enterprise level databases (MySQL, MS SQL, Oracle) which usually require writing your own front end, Access is much easier.--LucidGA 06:03, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Actually, my limited use of Access finds Base easier to use. ~Linuxerist L / T 01:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Not if you're used to doing it by writting your own frontend! gorffy 05:38, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Microsoft Access and Java?

This section seems misplaced in terms of its technical detail, and as obvious bit of product placement as Pepsi in "the Goonies". I'd suggest either a generic section about interfacing with MS Access or getting rid.194.152.93.186 11:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that code snippet is really technical and seems out of place. An everyman user isn't likely to understand a word of that.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.154.130.112 (talk • contribs) .

I'd like to see that moved into a page of it's own. Perhaps Microsoft_Access_ConnectionData or some other name indicating that it contains deeper technical details.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.177.235.245 (talk • contribs) .

I agree that it's really out of place and non-encyclopedic - the associated links are a little too esoteric and out of place for the rest of the article as well. Since no one has said anything in favor of the section over the last 45 days, I'm just going to drop the section. If you want to add a sub-page, you can grab the section back from history. Kuru ^talk 00:20, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

microsoft access

putting hyperlinks in memo fields

Screenshot

I think a better screenshot would be ideal as the current one doesn't appear to show much Medscin 17:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

What really is access?

While typically veiwed as a RDMS, Access would be better described as a generic database frontend. For example the mdb file format is more a part of JET than Access, although access does store the fron-end materials (Macros, forms, querys, and reports). Access actually supports using systems other than JET as the backend. It is true that Access was definately designed with JET in mind, but that does not mean it requires JET.

Unfortunately people seem to be confused by this. For eaxmple this quote in the article

Unlike complete RDBMSes, it lacks database triggers and stored procedures. It does allow forms to contain code that is
triggered as changes are made to the underlying table, and it is common to use pass-through queries and other techniques in
Access to run stored procedures in RDBMSs that support these.

That really is about JET. JET does appear to lack stored procedures and triggers. However, Access does have some limited support for those when using other database backends, and the second part of that quote does indicate that.

It is a shame that people are so confused about this. Tacvek 17:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

It's viewed that way because that is how it's marketed - as a single product, and that's how most users will use it. The compatibility with other relational back ends is noted several other times in the article, so it's not a relevation that changes the article. You're 100% right, though. If that one factiod is your only concern - change it to "Unlike complete RDBMSes, the default Jet backend lacks...". Kuru ^talk 00:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Access as a transitional platform

During the growth phase of a company, Access may be used to create "home brew" data systems that can bridge the transition from SME to a modern Enterprise in scale.
At a certain phase of a company's growth, though, the basic JET database engine behind Access begins to show its age with issues tending to crop up around the areas of multi-use, interoperability, reliability and scalability. Access 2002, for example, is limited to a file size of 2GB, which is fairly easily exceeded in today's business environment.
In its favour, however, the ability to migrate to an SQL Server back end via the Access "Upsizing Wizard" can not only extend the life of applications during a potentially stressful period of a company's growth, but can provide in effect a "prototyping stage" where a company's data model is built simply, later to evolve to an Enterprise relational database such as SQL Server. There may be similar transitional products, but none with quite such a broad following, as Access is often supplied as part of the familiar Microsoft Office desktop software suite and is thus many people's first introduction to data management and reporting beyond the simple file, word processing document, or spreadsheet.

It may be argued that this is not necessarily the optumum path toward Enterprise grade data management, but in practice development often follows that path until the establishment and implementation of an Enterprise architecture for the business. Significant integration challenges may follow this approach, but they are to a reasonable degree made easier by the pre-establishment of a relational database from which integration may then follow, via ETL (Extract, Transform, Load) techniques or EAI (Enterprise Application Integration) technologies offered by many integration service and product providers. KelleyJohnston (talk) 05:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

New Screenshot

I don't have a copy of Access (or Windows for that matter), so I cannot do this, but we need a new PNG screenshot. The JPEG one currently in use has too many artifacts. ~Linuxerist L / T 01:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Removed Link

I have put a link in the external links area of MS Access http://www.enflow.com/WhyUseAccess.htm and it has been removed and i was wondering why my link was removed when it is non commercial and is a tutorial on Access.

Some, actually MANY of the other external links ARE commercial links but they persist yet mine was removed by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FayssalF ...

i was wondering how do i contact him and ask him why ... thanks...

cj_008@comcast.net

cj...

It is a commercial website. -- Szvest 09:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up&#153;}

A valid observation, but not a valid argument for removing a link. The content on the linked web page is exactly as it says it is...Why Use Access? Robertwharvey 00:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

External links

The above user has left several messages on my talk page asking for more information on external linking at the Wikipedia. The applicable style guide is located at WP:EL; please read it. Here are my comments on the existing links:

Tutorials/tips:

• Microsoft Access Articles and Tutorials

Around 274 topically defined,very detailed and illustrated tutorials. Ads on tutorial pages are around 1-2% of content - not objectionable.

• More Access tutorials

40-50 tutorials, sample databases, and exercises. Illustrated and detailed. Small ads on each page. Two line prompt near top of page for non-html version of same data.

• A FAQ site about Microsoft Access

Dev Ashish's help page; fixture in most Access circles. No ads I could see.

• Microsoft Access for Beginners

Simple no-frills tutorials with illustrations and sample dbs. Link to author's resume on main page - nothing intrusive.

Forums:

• Utter Access Forums

Heavy traffic forums. No real 3rd party ads I could see. Just got bookmarked.

• Microsoft Access Newsgroups

Large set of forums. Seem to be named the same as the newsgroup forums - are these just an interface to newsgroups or original content?

Other:

• Microsoft Access Linklist

Link directory of Access related topics. Most links seemed to be on topic.

• Blog about Microsoft Access Tips and Tricks

Blog of access developer. Most entires are small; many are off-topic. Removed for now.

• History of JET database

Short, one-page history of the Jet database from 1996. Probably more applicable to Microsoft Jet Database Engine. Added Jet to "See Also" and removed this link.

• Additional info on history of Access

pointer to posting in google groups with more Jet history that is itself cribbed from "Jet DB Engine Programmer's Guide". Removed - should add to Microsoft Jet Database Engine if the content isn't covered there.

• Access Opener utility manages multiple versions

Link to site promoting a very specific add-on/tool. It's free, but I'm not sure what value it adds to the article - which is the point of any link. Removed for now.

Summary: I'd prefer to see only one tutorial site and maybe the link to the directory so people can add their links to that. Ads in a comprehensive guide or tutorial or forum with content that cannot be added here are fine as long as they are not out of control. Again, as editors we should be adding content to the article; not pitching our products. Please feel free to add to the comments above and correct my assumptions about the content of the links. Kuru ^talk 00:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Cleaned up the external links since it has been up for quite some times. I agree that only one tutorial link should be included. Inclusion of Microsoft Access for Beginners for Access starters. Forums have been removed. The actual Microsoft Access Newsgroup is found at Microsoft site and not pcreview.co.uk.Cocoma 16:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Unless the user who removed the Microsoft Access for Beginners external link can point to a Wikipedia policy prohibiting adding links to your own site, there is no valid reason why this link should be excluded from the article. This is a series of articles on a non-commercial site with minimal advertising. The information has been made available at no charge as have the repeated answers to questions from the many people who have e-mailed me after reading the articles. This link only serves to benefit those looking for further information and does not detract from the article in any way. Please cite the policy or leave the link alone. --Ajcomeau 22:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Opinions Please: I would like the opinions of other editors here on Wikipedia about the removal of an external link I posted to a video tutorial. The link I posted was this: Microsoft Access 101 Video Tutorial. It is a link to a 90-minute video tutorial on MS Access basics with absolutely NO advertising whatsoever on that page. The video does not try to solicit the user to buy anything. I believe that it is a valuable resource for people to learn Access with. I am having a disagreement with user Jaksmata about whether or not this link constitutes spam (see our full discussion HERE). He thinks it does. I respectfully disagree. Would other people please chime in and let me know your opinions here. My goal is simply to provide people with another tool for learning Access. Sure, it's a link back to my site, but I'm sure anyone who takes the time to watch this tutorial will see it's usefulness - and isn't that what Wikipedia is all about? To educate and inform? It's not just a shameless attempt at gaining awareness for my site. In fact, my link has been on this page for several months, and I have been tracking visitors. I get about a dozen clicks from it a day, but have had ZERO people buy one of my tutorials after clicking through. So I don't care about that. I just think it's a shame to remove a valuable tutorial because ONE user thinks it's spam. Amicron (talk) 23:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Control needs focus for programmatic access

You can't reference a property or method for a control unless the control has the focus.

This makes programming inconvenient, and may be a deliberate strategem of Microsoft to 'force' upgrade to VB or Visual Studio. There is no particular reason for this restriction; nothing in the inherent functionality of a form (at the systems level) that would require this. --Uncle Ed 17:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, that's incorrect. You can set, e.g. control.defaultvalue = k even if control doesn't have the focus

Controls don't need focus to set/get most properties, but there are a few, like the .Text property 68.47.9.211 12:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Trouble understanding

I'm having some trouble understanding what "Office Access, previously known as Microsoft Access, is an active secure database embedded in a virtual object-oriented work cluster." means. Any help would be greatfull. --121.45.192.252 13:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

It's because it's written in jargon. I've restore the previous lead in. If someone wants to rewrite the anonymous contribution to be understandable to a general audience looking for information on MSAccess, that would be great. Kuru ^talk 22:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Details?

There's lots of high-level perspective on Access here (it's good for X, bad at Y), but very little detail. Ideas to include would be descriptions of the basic types of objects like forms and reports, how they interconnect, the wizards, what's included in the different installations etc. Also, the different views (design, datasheet etc) and what they mean. Stevage 16:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

It definitely would be useful to do this. I came here to find this sort of data and have got rather lost a more behind-the-scenes focussed article that I doubt many people outside software developers will understand. I'd write it if I knew anything about it - but I don't (hence why I came here trying to find out) 134.225.137.160 (talk) 10:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Future of Access

It'd be great if we could add something about the future of Access. I was told Microsoft is hoping to phase out Access as a database format and repurpose it as a front-end and reporting tool for SQL Express. Foofy 15:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

This was once a rumour, but it is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.73 (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Reason for listing file extensions

I started a segment on the file extensions that Access uses to save info. I came here expecting there to be some mention already, as I was looking for a Access Report a co-worker made, but I did not know what file name he used so I figured I'd just search under the file extension but didn't remember what it saved them under. There was nothing here so I added the segment. There is already a redirect here for .mdb but there was no mention of what .mdb was on the page before. Sometimes people find files on a system and they don't know what there use is for, so they search under the file extension name to find out.--64.62.66.146 15:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Data file format

I would be happy to read about the data file formats of MS Access. Also a summary about (free and non-free) softwares that can handle MDB file would be nice. --Gaborgulya 22:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Access 1 1 cover.jpg

Image:Access 1 1 cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Stored Procedures and Triggers.

I've added stuff to the Features section to make it more correct.

In reading these notes, keep in mind that the term "Microsoft Access" means two different things to different people: (1) A part of MS Office Pro, and (2) The database engine accessed by the "Microsoft Access ODBC driver"

Most people think 'stored procedures' means procedures written in an SQL extension language that looks something like SQL, and stored in the database, so I don't want to get too far away from that.

Also, many people looking for stored procedures will be VB, MFC, and C++ developers: for them it is true that Access doesn't have stored procedures.

The critical difference is that non-Access clients can't get at the stored procedures, so for VB, MFC, and C++, Access does not have 'stored procedures', but for Access developers, Access does have 'stored procedures'. Of course this is 'advanced developer' stuff, so most Access users won't know about this either. However, it does fall within the meaning of the RDMS definitions: it's an embedded language in the RDB used for manipulating the RDB, and it's all stored in the RDB.

Access Basic, the RDB native language, was a native part of the Access Database system, even though VB was later developed from it. And VBA stored procedures can be called and executed through SQL, just like any other stored procedure. This is not a 'new' feature: it's been part of Access since at least version 2.

The notable new syntax for stored procedures in Access 2000/Jet 4.0 is a new syntax for creating (single-line SQL) stored procedures. The keyword 'procedure' was already there, and single-line stored procedures were already there. The keyword 'procedure' was not commonly used, but that's because then, as now, it was worthless. In Access 2000/Jet 4.0, the worthless keyword 'procedure' is retained inside the 'stored procedure' so when you look at the SQL, you can see the word 'procedure'.

BTW, there is another point that is of only historical interest: These single line Stored Procedures were historically the most common kind of stored procedure. Stored Procedures and Triggers were historically a work-around for the lack (in other RDBMS') of declarative referential integrity. So most stored procedures were one-liners, and most triggers were used to implement referential integrity. It's only after other RDBMS's got DRI that it became a common-place that triggers and stored procedures were those things you used to implement complex processes.

Triggers: again, the critical thing about Access triggers is not that they don't exist, but that they are non-standard and not usable by external clients. The "Microsoft Access ODBC driver" database system didn't implement triggers: it implemented DRI. The RDMS built in the database does implement triggers. In an article about Jet, it would be fair to say there were no triggers. In an article about Microsoft Access, it is fair to say that there is a limited, out-dated, non-standard technology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.166.15 (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Update: As mentioned elsewhere, you have to update this, as the JET engine (now called ACE) data engine for access 2010 has both stored procedures and triggers. These are true engine level triggers. So, even if you by-pass ms-access and open up the file using the ODBC drivers, the events + code will fire and run if you modify the data. This not related the create procedure you mention which in effect was only a select statement. The new triggers and procedures for ACE 2010 is code that runs, and that code can even update other tables, and maintain aggurate totals etc). This is true engine level store procedures that run when the data is modifed (from ms-access client or if you write an applicaion in vb.net that uses ACE as the data engine). When you publish the access application to the web those triggers will run server side... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albert Kallal (talk • contribs) 03:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Supported OSs - "Windows,Others"?

What others? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.60.125 (talk) 05:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

That depends on the version you choose. Obviously, not all versions will work with such windows-based OS like ReactOS. --76.201.144.238 (talk) 14:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MS Office 2003 Access screenshot.PNG

Image:MS Office 2003 Access screenshot.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

removed

"Since all database queries, forms, and reports are stored in the database, and in keeping with the ideals of the relational model, there is no possibility of making a physically structured hierarchy with them."

because (1), there is a way to make a physically structured hierarchy, using library databases for forms, reports, etc, and (2) Although the forms and reports are stored in the database, they are no longer stored in keeping with the ideals of the relational model - they are now all stored in a single blob in a single record. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.214.18.240 (talk) 11:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Backward (un)compatibility

Something needs to be said here about the lack of backward compatibility in Access databases. Databases that use VBA / macros made in Access 2003 will not work on Access 2007, etc. --194.249.198.32 (talk) 13:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that you have not been able to make your VBA/macros made in Access 2003 work on Access 2007 etc. Access 2007 can natively work with MDB files in Access 2000 format or Access 2002/2003 format. It will modify those files, e.g. adding new hidden system tables (such as MSysNavePaneGroups) and properties (such as UseMDIMode), but the files still work in the old versions. If you need more help, try the microsoft.public.access newsgroup, and look at www.allenbrowne.com/Access2007.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.166.15 (talk) 05:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

We've run many Access 2003 applications in Access 2007 without any problems regarding macros and VBA. I wonder if it's code that manipulated something that no longer exists or changed in 2007. Examples would be helpful. So far, we've had very good success migrating to 2007 and adding the new user interface features which makes the applications look much more modern. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DataAnalyzer (talk • contribs) 18:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I have been able to run old forms and VBA, from Access 2000-2003, in Access 2007. I have had very few difficulties and none that were not easily solved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thnder (talk • contribs) 21:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

SQL "standard"?

Can someone please expand upon exactly how compatible Access 'SQL' is with say ANSI or T-SQL (The language used to define queries)

Where is it defined, limitations, similarities etc....? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.240.212.1 (talk) 14:41, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Lead Sentence Consistency

The title of the article is (properly) Microsoft Access, that is the common name for it, that is the name for the overwhelming majority of the installed base. What their marketing department is this month calling the the particular version that they are currently selling is secondary. This makes the lead sentence wrong, plus it also conflicts with the title. North8000 (talk) 13:01, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Where is "Criticism" section?

Developers always have things to say about anything they work with: both about the application, DB flexibility, and performance. Where is all of this? Why no reference to speed tests and comparisons to competing applications? 93.80.239.87 (talk) 07:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Please post your new messages at the bottom of the page, not top. Fleet Command (talk) 16:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

"Migration Assistant" link is confusing.

In the section "Access to SQL Server Upsizing (SQL as a backend)" there is a link to a disambiguation page. This page page has two links, one to a piece of software for transitioning to Apple and the other to Ubuntu. Now, that page has it's own issues, but this link in this context is irrelevant, given that we're talking about moving from access DB to a SQL DB. I would say the the sentence is fine without this link and just the citation at the end. There is no article to explain what a migration assistant is and going to this disambiguation page is more confusing than helpful. A useful page might might be something regarding software interoperability in general, perhaps? BigDXLT (talk) 16:57, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Microsoft Access 2010 Front Box.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Microsoft Access 2010 Front Box.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:56, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

access

I want to learn that how improve my page in so much sites about access. I realy want to know the new indexers of google that can help me to use SEO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.146.10.236 (talk) 11:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

access 2007

How to make table in access 2007? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.146.10.236 (talk) 12:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Title change to reflect new version title

Since "Microsoft Access" has changed to "Microsoft Office Access," shouldn't the main title reflect the new name? People searching for Microsoft Access still will be redirected to the correct link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.151.162 (talk) 08:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Updating 2010 icon to 2013 icon

File:Microsoft-Access-2013-Icon.svg

Would it be too early to replace the 2010 icon with the new 2013 version even thought it is still in beta?
The new icon is at: File:Microsoft-Access-2013-Icon.svg
Zywxn |  08:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Today's additions

Nice work / thanks for the addition. Would be even better / less vague if didn't have so many vague advertising type words. If you wanted to tweak that, a good place to start would be to remove each of the 10 instances of the word 'solution" and replace it with a noun of what the item actually is. North8000 (talk) 19:04, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

comprehensible by the non tech oriented?

Just a thought -- Couldn't this article start by explaining what is Microsoft Acess in way that would be understandable by the general reader, i.e. those who are not computer experts? Currently, I believe that is not the case — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.241.227 (talk) 05:56, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I think that that would involve explaining what a relational database and a relational database management system are. That would involve duplicating those other articles which are linked in the lead. North8000 (talk) 14:06, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

C#?

theres no citation that proves that access is written in c# Sofia Koutsouveli 2005 (talk) 14:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC) Microsoft Access is most assuredly not written in C# as development of the product was started in about 1992. At least a decade or more before .Net was created. Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP 1999-2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttoews (talk • contribs) 05:46, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

I took it out. Challenged in November and now, unsourced, and per above, looks implausible. North8000 (talk) 14:02, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

The controversy that wasn't

Hello

I am posting this explanation as a follow up to my reversion of a contribution number 783500068 by Computermichael. The contribution was as follows:

Microsoft Access has been criticized by the business and IT community for numerous reasons.[REF: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10-things/10-plus-reasons-why-it-pros-hate-microsoft-access-but-really-shouldnt/] The lack of online support, lack of integration support with other database systems, large amount of training required to master, and periodic reports of data corruption have made the software unpopular among database administrators. The platform is far less common than MySQL, which is the industry standard.[REF: https://www.brentozar.com/archive/2010/02/top-10-reasons-why-access-still-doesnt-rock/]

Problems:

1. There are statements that their opposite appears in the sources given:
   • lack of integration support with other database systems (2nd ref: 'Integration with “real” databases')
   • large amount of training required to master (1st ref: '#5: It's too easy')
   • The lack of online support (2nd ref: 'Vast online community to offer free help'. Of course, the source goes on to say that the SQL Server community is even more expansive; nevertheless...)
2. This statement doesn't appear in any of the sources: "The platform is far less common than MySQL, which is the industry standard."
3. The 2nd source is a self-published blog
4. None of these indicate any controversy whatsoever. Criticism is not controversy. But one's criticism may spark controversy.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:47, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Microsoft Access. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130615094438/http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/office-2003-resource-kit/office-2003-licensing-and-system-requirements-HA001140301.aspx to http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/office-2003-resource-kit/office-2003-licensing-and-system-requirements-HA001140301.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

microsoft access es una compa;ia creada por diego gonzales, un filosofo indio nacido en hafggunja el ahora vive en pan ama brisas del golf ,y se le puede reconocer facilmente por su pelo y grandes orejas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.131.13.194 (talk) 13:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Northwind database sample

Can I add a section for most common database sample by Microsoft ? . Omda4wady (talk) 10:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Just my opinion, but I think it's a good idea. IMHO best to keep it short, at least to start. North8000 (talk) 12:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Mac?

The footer has this tagged as "MacOS database-related software", but the header doesn't list macOS as a supported platform. Has there ever been Access for Mac? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.109.4.101 (talk) 00:42, 7 October 2020 (UTC)