|
dev
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Why choose SQL Express over Access?Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies? Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application
to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, since your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. 1) It's free. 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb files
with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that you install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it with my app, is there a silent install available? <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message Show quote news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, since > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. > > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. > 1) It's free. > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. > Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released this
summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx -- Show quoteWilliam Stacey [MVP] "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb files | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that you | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. | | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it with | my app, is there a silent install available? | | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, since | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. | > | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. | > 1) It's free. | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. | > | | Awesome!
It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS though. That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web development so much easier! It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server. But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server. If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king. Thanks for the great link! Show quote "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released > this > summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. > http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx > > -- > William Stacey [MVP] > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb > files > | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that > you > | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. > | > | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it > with > | my app, is there a silent install available? > | > | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message > | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... > | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application > | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, > since > | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for > | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. > | > > | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. > | > 1) It's free. > | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. > | > > | > | > > | It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS Couldn't you use SQL Express for that?| though. Yep....but that defeats the whole ease-of-use thing that a no-install
solution like SQLite or SQL\e provides. Especially when you have a hosted web-app.....SQL\e would be perfect for that. Nothing to "install" (i.e. register) on the hosts servers. It's just that MS wants you to pay to do a decent web-app. IMHO, it helps them control competition somewhat (at least from the little guys) to thier web-centric offerings. What other reasons could thier be to specifically disable it under any IIS process? Greed? As far as I can see....if you're small and have a great idea, MS SQL is probably NOT the thing to use (at least SQLite is easier to deploy and has greater capacity than SQL\e or SQL\x). Show quote "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:uycu0lFhGHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >| It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS > | though. > > Couldn't you use SQL Express for that? > > Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot. It's
not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is. Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search. If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum. -- Show quote____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > Awesome! > > It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS > though. > > That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web > development so much easier! > > It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at > succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server. > > But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses > grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten the bottom > line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a > "grown up" version of SQL Server. > > If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king. > > Thanks for the great link! > > > > "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released >> this >> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. >> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx >> >> -- >> William Stacey [MVP] >> >> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb >> files >> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that >> you >> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. >> | >> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it >> with >> | my app, is there a silent install available? >> | >> | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message >> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... >> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed >> application >> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, >> since >> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for >> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. >> | > >> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. >> | > 1) It's free. >> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. >> | > >> | >> | >> >> > > "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased.
Show quote "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot. > It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is. > Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It now > offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL Everywhere, > SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes the Reporting > Services engine as well as Full Text Search. > > If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum. > > -- > ____________________________________ > William (Bill) Vaughn > Author, Mentor, Consultant > Microsoft MVP > INETA Speaker > www.betav.com/blog/billva > www.betav.com > Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no > rights. > __________________________________ > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> Awesome! >> >> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS >> though. >> >> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web >> development so much easier! >> >> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at >> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server. >> >> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses >> grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten the bottom >> line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a >> "grown up" version of SQL Server. >> >> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king. >> >> Thanks for the great link! >> >> >> >> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released >>> this >>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. >>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx >>> >>> -- >>> William Stacey [MVP] >>> >>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb >>> files >>> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that >>> you >>> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. >>> | >>> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it >>> with >>> | my app, is there a silent install available? >>> | >>> | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... >>> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed >>> application >>> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, >>> since >>> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for >>> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. >>> | > >>> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. >>> | > 1) It's free. >>> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. >>> | > >>> | >>> | >>> >>> >> >> > > Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased.
I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft. - Sahil Malik http://www.winsmarts.com http://blah.winsmarts.com Show quote "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net... > "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased. > > > "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message > news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot. >> It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is. >> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It >> now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL >> Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes >> the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search. >> >> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum. >> >> -- >> ____________________________________ >> William (Bill) Vaughn >> Author, Mentor, Consultant >> Microsoft MVP >> INETA Speaker >> www.betav.com/blog/billva >> www.betav.com >> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. >> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no >> rights. >> __________________________________ >> >> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>> Awesome! >>> >>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under >>> IIS though. >>> >>> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web >>> development so much easier! >>> >>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at >>> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server. >>> >>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses >>> grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten the bottom >>> line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a >>> "grown up" version of SQL Server. >>> >>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king. >>> >>> Thanks for the great link! >>> >>> >>> >>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released >>>> this >>>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. >>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx >>>> >>>> -- >>>> William Stacey [MVP] >>>> >>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb >>>> files >>>> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that >>>> you >>>> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. >>>> | >>>> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute >>>> it >>>> with >>>> | my app, is there a silent install available? >>>> | >>>> | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... >>>> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed >>>> application >>>> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, >>>> since >>>> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify >>>> for >>>> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. >>>> | > >>>> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. >>>> | > 1) It's free. >>>> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. >>>> | > >>>> | >>>> | >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > Of course you must....
Show quote "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased. > > I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same > pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft. > > - Sahil Malik > http://www.winsmarts.com > http://blah.winsmarts.com > > > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net... >> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased. >> >> >> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message >> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot. >>> It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is. >>> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It >>> now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL >>> Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes >>> the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search. >>> >>> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum. >>> >>> -- >>> ____________________________________ >>> William (Bill) Vaughn >>> Author, Mentor, Consultant >>> Microsoft MVP >>> INETA Speaker >>> www.betav.com/blog/billva >>> www.betav.com >>> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. >>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no >>> rights. >>> __________________________________ >>> >>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>> Awesome! >>>> >>>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under >>>> IIS though. >>>> >>>> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web >>>> development so much easier! >>>> >>>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at >>>> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server. >>>> >>>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small >>>> businesses grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten >>>> the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses >>>> and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server. >>>> >>>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king. >>>> >>>> Thanks for the great link! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be >>>>> released this >>>>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. >>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> William Stacey [MVP] >>>>> >>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb >>>>> files >>>>> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires >>>>> that you >>>>> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. >>>>> | >>>>> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute >>>>> it >>>>> with >>>>> | my app, is there a silent install available? >>>>> | >>>>> | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... >>>>> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed >>>>> application >>>>> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, >>>>> since >>>>> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify >>>>> for >>>>> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. >>>>> | > >>>>> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. >>>>> | > 1) It's free. >>>>> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. >>>>> | > >>>>> | >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > Excuse me? Are you accusing us of something? I would make pretty sure you're
on solid ground before impugning our honesty in a public forum. If you really knew me, if you really understood where I have stood for the last 20 years, you would not be saying anything about how I coddle Microsoft or show bias toward their products. From time to time I have been highly critical of Microsoft--even as an employee (for 14 years). Microsoft has not always liked to hear what I have said, but they have listened--just as they listen to every one with any credibility at all. I for one have just finished my 11th book on this subject and yes, this book like all the others talks about what works and what does not. Do you think you fall into that category? -- Show quote____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:3Cqfg.4977$8e2.2263@bignews1.bellsouth.net... > Of course you must.... > > "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased. >> >> I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same >> pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft. >> >> - Sahil Malik >> http://www.winsmarts.com >> http://blah.winsmarts.com >> >> >> >> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >> news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net... >>> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased. >>> >>> >>> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message >>> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot. >>>> It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is. >>>> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It >>>> now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL >>>> Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes >>>> the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search. >>>> >>>> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ____________________________________ >>>> William (Bill) Vaughn >>>> Author, Mentor, Consultant >>>> Microsoft MVP >>>> INETA Speaker >>>> www.betav.com/blog/billva >>>> www.betav.com >>>> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. >>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no >>>> rights. >>>> __________________________________ >>>> >>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>> Awesome! >>>>> >>>>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under >>>>> IIS though. >>>>> >>>>> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web >>>>> development so much easier! >>>>> >>>>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at >>>>> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server. >>>>> >>>>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small >>>>> businesses grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten >>>>> the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses >>>>> and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server. >>>>> >>>>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the great link! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be >>>>>> released this >>>>>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. >>>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> William Stacey [MVP] >>>>>> >>>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>>> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the >>>>>> .mdb files >>>>>> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires >>>>>> that you >>>>>> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. >>>>>> | >>>>>> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute >>>>>> it >>>>>> with >>>>>> | my app, is there a silent install available? >>>>>> | >>>>>> | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... >>>>>> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed >>>>>> application >>>>>> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, >>>>>> since >>>>>> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify >>>>>> for >>>>>> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. >>>>>> | > 1) It's free. >>>>>> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. >>>>>> | > >>>>>> | >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > Bill, it took me a while to realize this, but I think you're wrestling with
a pig. He is enjoying it, and you're getting dirty. - Sahil Malik http://www.winsmarts.com http://blah.winsmarts.com Show quote "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message news:O8K6C0RhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Excuse me? Are you accusing us of something? I would make pretty sure > you're on solid ground before impugning our honesty in a public forum. If > you really knew me, if you really understood where I have stood for the > last 20 years, you would not be saying anything about how I coddle > Microsoft or show bias toward their products. From time to time I have > been highly critical of Microsoft--even as an employee (for 14 years). > Microsoft has not always liked to hear what I have said, but they have > listened--just as they listen to every one with any credibility at all. I > for one have just finished my 11th book on this subject and yes, this book > like all the others talks about what works and what does not. > > Do you think you fall into that category? > > -- > ____________________________________ > William (Bill) Vaughn > Author, Mentor, Consultant > Microsoft MVP > INETA Speaker > www.betav.com/blog/billva > www.betav.com > Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no > rights. > __________________________________ > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:3Cqfg.4977$8e2.2263@bignews1.bellsouth.net... >> Of course you must.... >> >> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased. >>> >>> I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same >>> pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft. >>> >>> - Sahil Malik >>> http://www.winsmarts.com >>> http://blah.winsmarts.com >>> >>> >>> >>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>> news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net... >>>> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased. >>>> >>>> >>>> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message >>>> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere >>>>> cannot. It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is. >>>>> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It >>>>> now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL >>>>> Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that >>>>> includes the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search. >>>>> >>>>> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ____________________________________ >>>>> William (Bill) Vaughn >>>>> Author, Mentor, Consultant >>>>> Microsoft MVP >>>>> INETA Speaker >>>>> www.betav.com/blog/billva >>>>> www.betav.com >>>>> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. >>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no >>>>> rights. >>>>> __________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>>> Awesome! >>>>>> >>>>>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under >>>>>> IIS though. >>>>>> >>>>>> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web >>>>>> development so much easier! >>>>>> >>>>>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot >>>>>> at succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL >>>>>> Server. >>>>>> >>>>>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small >>>>>> businesses grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually >>>>>> fatten the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS >>>>>> licenses and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server. >>>>>> >>>>>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db >>>>>> king. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the great link! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be >>>>>>> released this >>>>>>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. >>>>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> William Stacey [MVP] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>>>> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the >>>>>>> .mdb files >>>>>>> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires >>>>>>> that you >>>>>>> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to >>>>>>> redistribute it >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> | my app, is there a silent install available? >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed >>>>>>> application >>>>>>> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. >>>>>>> And, since >>>>>>> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. >>>>>>> | > >>>>>>> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. >>>>>>> | > 1) It's free. >>>>>>> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. >>>>>>> | > >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message You accussed me, Billy. Remember this...."If you just want to bash news:O8K6C0RhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Excuse me? Are you accusing us of something? Microsoft, find some other forum."? You take an accusatory tone with me. You attack my posts without reading them (if you had, you'd have seen that the theme here was not one of "just bashing Microsoft"). And, YOU have the audacity to ask me if I am questioning YOUR integrity? Well, I am questioning your integrity. Not because I have reason to outside what you have posted here, but simply because of the tact that you used when accusing me of "just bashing Microsoft". That's something that only a Microsoft zealot could have possibly read into this entire thread. You are acting like a zealot. Your reaction to my dissappointment with Microsoft's decision-to-date on SQL\e and the typical way in which they price thier products out of reach of many small businesses was one of etremism and showed a complete lack of understanding of my comments as they related to the entire thread. I accept you at your word that you call Microsoft out when need be (as don't have time to verify this myself). But, for you to characterize my entire thread as simple "Microsoft bashing" because I expressed my unflattering opinions about some of Microsoft's actions is both unprofessional and dishonest. I am not familiar with your writings. They may be quite well done. However, they are irrelevant when your actions here have shown you to be quick to jump to conclusions of "Microsoft bashing" based on less than 10% of the content of the thread. Publishing a book niether makes you a scholar nor an adept teacher. It makes you an author. My congratulations on your publishing feats. I hope you published works better thought out than your biting response to a single post of mine. As for answering your question ("Do you think that you fall into that category?")... This is both arrogant and ignorant at the same time. Quite a feat for a published author. I look forward to your thoughts on anything that I post. But, please do not characterize me or my threads based on a minority of the postings therein. Jim Hubbard Show quote > I would make pretty sure you're on solid ground before impugning our > honesty in a public forum. If you really knew me, if you really understood > where I have stood for the last 20 years, you would not be saying anything > about how I coddle Microsoft or show bias toward their products. From time > to time I have been highly critical of Microsoft--even as an employee (for > 14 years). Microsoft has not always liked to hear what I have said, but > they have listened--just as they listen to every one with any credibility > at all. I for one have just finished my 11th book on this subject and yes, > this book like all the others talks about what works and what does not. > > Do you think you fall into that category? > > -- > ____________________________________ > William (Bill) Vaughn > Author, Mentor, Consultant > Microsoft MVP > INETA Speaker > www.betav.com/blog/billva > www.betav.com > Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no > rights. > __________________________________ > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:3Cqfg.4977$8e2.2263@bignews1.bellsouth.net... >> Of course you must.... >> >> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased. >>> >>> I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same >>> pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft. >>> >>> - Sahil Malik >>> http://www.winsmarts.com >>> http://blah.winsmarts.com >>> >>> >>> >>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>> news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net... >>>> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased. >>>> >>>> >>>> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message >>>> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere >>>>> cannot. It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is. >>>>> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It >>>>> now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL >>>>> Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that >>>>> includes the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search. >>>>> >>>>> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ____________________________________ >>>>> William (Bill) Vaughn >>>>> Author, Mentor, Consultant >>>>> Microsoft MVP >>>>> INETA Speaker >>>>> www.betav.com/blog/billva >>>>> www.betav.com >>>>> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. >>>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no >>>>> rights. >>>>> __________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>>> Awesome! >>>>>> >>>>>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under >>>>>> IIS though. >>>>>> >>>>>> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web >>>>>> development so much easier! >>>>>> >>>>>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot >>>>>> at succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL >>>>>> Server. >>>>>> >>>>>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small >>>>>> businesses grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually >>>>>> fatten the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS >>>>>> licenses and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server. >>>>>> >>>>>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db >>>>>> king. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the great link! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be >>>>>>> released this >>>>>>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls. >>>>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> William Stacey [MVP] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>>>> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the >>>>>>> .mdb files >>>>>>> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires >>>>>>> that you >>>>>>> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound. >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to >>>>>>> redistribute it >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> | my app, is there a silent install available? >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> | <james.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed >>>>>>> application >>>>>>> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. >>>>>>> And, since >>>>>>> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question. >>>>>>> | > >>>>>>> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them. >>>>>>> | > 1) It's free. >>>>>>> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server. >>>>>>> | > >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > ljh wrote:
Show quote > I don't think that's beneficial to the discussion. > "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in > message news:O8K6C0RhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > > Excuse me? Are you accusing us of something? > > You accussed me, Billy. Remember this...."If you just want to bash > Microsoft, find some other forum."? > > You take an accusatory tone with me. You attack my posts without > reading them (if you had, you'd have seen that the theme here was not > one of "just bashing Microsoft"). And, YOU have the audacity to ask > me if I am questioning YOUR integrity? > > Well, I am questioning your integrity. > Not because I have reason to outside what you have posted here, but While Bill and I are often not agreeing on a subject, I can tell you> simply because of the tact that you used when accusing me of "just > bashing Microsoft". That's something that only a Microsoft zealot > could have possibly read into this entire thread. he's honest in what he says. He might have overreacted a bit in his previous reply, but let me explain abit why I think he did and I fully understand why he did: we as MVP's are often accused of being biased towards Microsoft, shutting our eyes for the real problems, ignoring the difficulties Joe Developer has to fight with because that would hurt Microsoft etc. etc. That's not the case, far from it. Sure, there are MVP's who only preach 'good news' and won't say a bad word about MS or its products. Though you won't find these MVPs in the newsgroups answering questions of others. So please re-consider what you said. > You are acting like a zealot. Your reaction to my dissappointment Perhaps your 'packaging' of the 'message' wasn't matching the message> with Microsoft's decision-to-date on SQL\e and the typical way in > which they price thier products out of reach of many small businesses > was one of etremism and showed a complete lack of understanding of my > comments as they related to the entire thread. it was packaging :). > I accept you at your word that you call Microsoft out when need be Read between the lines. We have to do that with your texts as well. If> (as don't have time to verify this myself). But, for you to > characterize my entire thread as simple "Microsoft bashing" because I > expressed my unflattering opinions about some of Microsoft's actions > is both unprofessional and dishonest. I say "This SUCKS!!!", I might be right, but no-one will listen. Trust me, if you want to get a point across, it's of upmost importancy that the audience of which you want the attention of is willing to read your texts to the last line. > As for answering your question ("Do you think that you fall into that I have to agree in this, but this is usenet, we all forget everyone> category?")... This is both arrogant and ignorant at the same time. > Quite a feat for a published author. can read what we say from time to time. FB -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Lead developer of LLBLGen Pro, the productive O/R mapper for .NET LLBLGen Pro website: http://www.llblgen.com My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma Microsoft MVP (C#) ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Show quote
"Frans Bouma [C# MVP]" <perseus.usenetNOSPAM@xs4all.nl> wrote in message You're right. I need to do a better job of not drifting off topic.news:xn0emyfed4urv0001@news.microsoft.com... > ljh wrote: > >> >> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in >> message news:O8K6C0RhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> > Excuse me? Are you accusing us of something? >> >> You accussed me, Billy. Remember this...."If you just want to bash >> Microsoft, find some other forum."? >> >> You take an accusatory tone with me. You attack my posts without >> reading them (if you had, you'd have seen that the theme here was not >> one of "just bashing Microsoft"). And, YOU have the audacity to ask >> me if I am questioning YOUR integrity? >> >> Well, I am questioning your integrity. > > I don't think that's beneficial to the discussion. Show quote > I do not know Bill personally and I have not read any of his published works >> Not because I have reason to outside what you have posted here, but >> simply because of the tact that you used when accusing me of "just >> bashing Microsoft". That's something that only a Microsoft zealot >> could have possibly read into this entire thread. > > While Bill and I are often not agreeing on a subject, I can tell you > he's honest in what he says. He might have overreacted a bit in his > previous reply, but let me explain abit why I think he did and I fully > understand why he did: we as MVP's are often accused of being biased > towards Microsoft, shutting our eyes for the real problems, ignoring > the difficulties Joe Developer has to fight with because that would > hurt Microsoft etc. etc. > > That's not the case, far from it. Sure, there are MVP's who only > preach 'good news' and won't say a bad word about MS or its products. > Though you won't find these MVPs in the newsgroups answering questions > of others. So please re-consider what you said. > (as I stated here). I can only go by his actions and comments here - and he can only go by mine. Although Bill may be well-known in ceretain circles, we all don't travel in the same circles. And, although it certainly doesn't look like it here, I am a HUGE fan of Microsoft. When I speak to Linux OS and programming people, I sing the praises of Microsoft and VB. Linux could learn a lot from Microsoft, and would benefit greatly for it. It has been my experience that singing Microsoft's praises in a Microsoft newsgroup may not be the most efficient use of time. If we hated Microsoft, we wouldn't be here trying to learn how to use the products better. But that too is off topic. The original question is still one I am debating. I can see strengths and weaknesses in both products. Matching the right one with my client is the trick. Microsoft has done many great things. For me, that makes it all the more dissappointing to see them (IMHO) tripping at the goal line so often. I do not envy Microsoft's position. Millions of people to satisfy - and no way to please them all. But, I honestly believe that allowinf SQL\e to be used under an IIS process would be something that would excite the vast majority of them - and I cannot see a good reason for blocking that use. >> You are acting like a zealot. Your reaction to my dissappointment I must learn not to respond to posts after I get very tired. I should just >> with Microsoft's decision-to-date on SQL\e and the typical way in >> which they price thier products out of reach of many small businesses >> was one of etremism and showed a complete lack of understanding of my >> comments as they related to the entire thread. > > Perhaps your 'packaging' of the 'message' wasn't matching the message > it was packaging :). > go to bed and respond the next day - a little more level headed and less sleep deprived. When I make that mistake, I tend to (as you have seen here) write more from emotion than fact. This is not helpful to the thread at all. I will try and not repeat that mistake. >> I accept you at your word that you call Microsoft out when need be You are right.>> (as don't have time to verify this myself). But, for you to >> characterize my entire thread as simple "Microsoft bashing" because I >> expressed my unflattering opinions about some of Microsoft's actions >> is both unprofessional and dishonest. > > Read between the lines. We have to do that with your texts as well. If > I say "This SUCKS!!!", I might be right, but no-one will listen. Trust > me, if you want to get a point across, it's of upmost importancy that > the audience of which you want the attention of is willing to read your > texts to the last line. > Yes they can. It may behoove us to leave a cleaner image for those that >> As for answering your question ("Do you think that you fall into that >> category?")... This is both arrogant and ignorant at the same time. >> Quite a feat for a published author. > > I have to agree in this, but this is usenet, we all forget everyone > can read what we say from time to time. will sort through our trash when we're gone and cannot explain our (sometimes) thoughtless actions. ljh On Wed, 31 May 2006 20:34:56 -0400, "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote: Just curious...what are you getting out of this? Mr Malik and Mr>Of course you must.... Vaughn have complete credibility and both have written books on database programming. Still, you've answered your own question: You should use Access. Just make sure it's not Microsoft Access cause that would be bad. Short incomplete list of reasons -
- SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple users. - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized backups *.*) - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, better T-SQL*.* - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) - You won't have to compact it as often - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. - Other reasons. The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway. - Sahil Malik http://www.winsmarts.com Show quote "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application > to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no > dependencies? > > > I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.
The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) - http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere . I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they have abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so. They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be about it. Show quote "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Short incomplete list of reasons - > > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple > users. > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized > backups *.*) > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, > better T-SQL*.* > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) > - You won't have to compact it as often > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. > - Other reasons. > > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications > anyway. > > - Sahil Malik > http://www.winsmarts.com > > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application >> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no >> dependencies? >> >> >> > > ljh wrote:
> I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site. Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll > > The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you > something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) - > http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere . never amount to anything. However, I used the product a couple of years ago and it is solid. It has all the drivers and easy of use and surprising performance and all that. > I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland. You got your vendors confused. Show quote > whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they have > abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so. > > They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be about > it. > > "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Short incomplete list of reasons - >> >> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple >> users. >> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB >> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized >> backups *.*) >> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, >> better T-SQL*.* >> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) >> - You won't have to compact it as often >> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. >> - Other reasons. >> >> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And >> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these >> name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications >> anyway. >> >> - Sahil Malik >> http://www.winsmarts.com >> >> >> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application >>> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no >>> dependencies? >>> >>> >>> >> > > You're right..... I got Sybase and Borland mixed up. Must've been that
whole JBuilder collaboration thing that threw me. They are definitely not the same company. Show quote "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message news:%23rBSlsDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > ljh wrote: >> I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site. >> >> The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you >> something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) - >> http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere . > > Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll > never amount to anything. However, I used the product a couple of years > ago and it is solid. It has all the drivers and easy of use and > surprising performance and all that. > >> I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the > I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland. You got your > vendors confused. > > >> whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they >> have abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so. >> >> They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be >> about it. >> >> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> Short incomplete list of reasons - >>> >>> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple >>> users. >>> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB >>> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized >>> backups *.*) >>> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, >>> better T-SQL*.* >>> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) >>> - You won't have to compact it as often >>> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. >>> - Other reasons. >>> >>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And >>> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these >>> name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications >>> anyway. >>> >>> - Sahil Malik >>> http://www.winsmarts.com >>> >>> >>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed >>>> application to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which >>>> has no dependencies? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> Speaking of Borland....
I remembered this discussion when I read yesterday that Borland is getting out of the IDE business altogether. Chief Borland evangelist David Intersomine announced the company's plans to spin off the IDE product line way back in February on his blog at http://blogs.borland.com/davidi/archive/2006/02/08/23013.aspx. In the blog, David seems to indicate that Borland is simply starting a new company for this line of Borland's products, but the magazine PC Plus (issue 242) says that Borland has been shopping for a buyer for the IDE business lines since February and that tension is mounting as core people leave the company because of Borland's lack of commitment to its developer tools products. I don't really see how it could have played out any differently. IMHO, most people that choose to go .Net will not keep thier old language while doing so. I mean, what's the point? Just make the move and be done with it. Well, just thought you'd like to know.... Show quote "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:_M4fg.66488$MM6.56651@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > You're right..... I got Sybase and Borland mixed up. Must've been that > whole JBuilder collaboration thing that threw me. > > They are definitely not the same company. > > "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message > news:%23rBSlsDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> ljh wrote: >>> I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site. >>> >>> The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you >>> something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) - >>> http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere . >> >> Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll >> never amount to anything. However, I used the product a couple of years >> ago and it is solid. It has all the drivers and easy of use and >> surprising performance and all that. >> >>> I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the >> I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland. You got your >> vendors confused. >> >> >>> whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they >>> have abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so. >>> >>> They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be >>> about it. >>> >>> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message >>> news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>> Short incomplete list of reasons - >>>> >>>> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple >>>> users. >>>> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB >>>> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized >>>> backups *.*) >>>> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, >>>> better T-SQL*.* >>>> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) >>>> - You won't have to compact it as often >>>> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. >>>> - Other reasons. >>>> >>>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And >>>> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these >>>> name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications >>>> anyway. >>>> >>>> - Sahil Malik >>>> http://www.winsmarts.com >>>> >>>> >>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >>>> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed >>>>> application to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which >>>>> has no dependencies? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> > It is Sql Everywhere. Check out the faq in the linq I gave above. For the
most part, it is Sql Mobile with a license change that will run anywhere (XP, etc). -- Show quoteWilliam Stacey [MVP] "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:7t2fg.66189$MM6.15646@bignews3.bellsouth.net... |I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site. | | The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you | something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) - | http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere . | | I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the | whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they have | abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so. | | They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be about | it. | | "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message | news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... | > Short incomplete list of reasons - | > | > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple | > users. | > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB | > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized | > backups *.*) | > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, | > better T-SQL*.* | > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) | > - You won't have to compact it as often | > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. | > - Other reasons. | > | > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And | > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these | > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications | > anyway. | > | > - Sahil Malik | > http://www.winsmarts.com | > | > | > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message | > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... | >> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application | >> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no | >> dependencies? | >> | >> | >> | > | > | | Yup thats it .. SQL Everywhere.
SM :) Show quote "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:%23RVmO%23DhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > It is Sql Everywhere. Check out the faq in the linq I gave above. For > the > most part, it is Sql Mobile with a license change that will run anywhere > (XP, etc). > > -- > William Stacey [MVP] > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:7t2fg.66189$MM6.15646@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > |I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site. > | > | The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you > | something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) - > | http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere . > | > | I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the > | whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they > have > | abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so. > | > | They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be > about > | it. > | > | "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message > | news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > | > Short incomplete list of reasons - > | > > | > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple > | > users. > | > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB > | > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized > | > backups *.*) > | > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, > | > better T-SQL*.* > | > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) > | > - You won't have to compact it as often > | > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. > | > - Other reasons. > | > > | > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And > | > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all > these > | > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications > | > anyway. > | > > | > - Sahil Malik > | > http://www.winsmarts.com > | > > | > > | > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > | > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > | >> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed > application > | >> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no > | >> dependencies? > | >> > | >> > | >> > | > > | > > | > | > > Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking compatability
with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be able to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to deploy them at all - easy or not). This goes right along with my experience with every single MS product I have ever purchased. Thier slogan should be "When you need it *almost* right." Oh well.....I'm still looking into the free SQLite. It has an add-in for VS.Net 2005 support and is not limited to 4GB of data. Oh yeah...it's only one file (no dependencies) and it's completely free. I'll let you know how my testing with it goes. Show quote "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message news:%23YpMqGFhGHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Yup thats it .. SQL Everywhere. > > SM :) > > > "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:%23RVmO%23DhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> It is Sql Everywhere. Check out the faq in the linq I gave above. For >> the >> most part, it is Sql Mobile with a license change that will run anywhere >> (XP, etc). >> >> -- >> William Stacey [MVP] >> >> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >> news:7t2fg.66189$MM6.15646@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> |I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site. >> | >> | The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you >> | something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) - >> | http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere . >> | >> | I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with >> the >> | whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they >> have >> | abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so. >> | >> | They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be >> about >> | it. >> | >> | "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in >> message >> | news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> | > Short incomplete list of reasons - >> | > >> | > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to >> multiple >> | > users. >> | > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB >> | > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized >> | > backups *.*) >> | > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, >> | > better T-SQL*.* >> | > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary) >> | > - You won't have to compact it as often >> | > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc. >> | > - Other reasons. >> | > >> | > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And >> | > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all >> these >> | > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications >> | > anyway. >> | > >> | > - Sahil Malik >> | > http://www.winsmarts.com >> | > >> | > >> | > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >> | > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> | >> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed >> application >> | >> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no >> | >> dependencies? >> | >> >> | >> >> | >> >> | > >> | > >> | >> | >> >> > > | Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking compatability Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql query | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your own host? | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be able Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to | deploy them at all - easy or not). free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS. -- wjs "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed him news:eE$gLoFhGHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking compatability > | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". > > Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql > query > is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your > own > host? earlier today. > It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For ASP.Net > | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be > able > | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to > | deploy them at all - easy or not). > > Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is > free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS. hosted webservers, it sucks. Okay .. why does SQL express suck? It doesn't suck .. !!! It runs on a full
fledged SQL engine, sure deployment is a pain, but migrating to a fullblown SQL Server is relatively painless. Also, can you elaborate - >>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking ?>>compatability >> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". - Sahil Malik http://www.winsmarts.com http://blah.winsmarts.com Show quote "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:mo7fg.66883$MM6.52917@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > > "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:eE$gLoFhGHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking >>compatability >> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". >> >> Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql >> query >> is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your >> own >> host? > > Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed > him earlier today. > >> >> | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be >> able >> | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to >> | deploy them at all - easy or not). >> >> Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is >> free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS. > > It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For > ASP.Net hosted webservers, it sucks. > > The fact that you can't control SQL Express (due to the fact that you
usually don't control the HOSTED servers) and that you could get more data into SQL Everywhere (or SQLite for that matter) simply by using the available disk space than you do with most hosted website's db plans (which will include hosted SQL Express servers) sucks! The fact that MS has an edition of Mobile SQL that they are making available for everything except IIS use sucks! The fact that Micrsoft added code to SQL Everywhere to PREVENT it from being used in an IIS process sucks! What about that don't you get? Microsoft again makes a valiant run downfield with the ball.....only to stop and sit on the 1 yard line. Show quote "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message news:OrGZK8GhGHA.4080@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Okay .. why does SQL express suck? It doesn't suck .. !!! It runs on a > full fledged SQL engine, sure deployment is a pain, but migrating to a > fullblown SQL Server is relatively painless. > > > Also, can you elaborate - > >>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking >>>compatability >>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". > > > ? > > - Sahil Malik > http://www.winsmarts.com > http://blah.winsmarts.com > > > > > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message > news:mo7fg.66883$MM6.52917@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> >> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:eE$gLoFhGHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking >>>compatability >>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". >>> >>> Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql >>> query >>> is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your >>> own >>> host? >> >> Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed >> him earlier today. >> >>> >>> | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be >>> able >>> | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it >>> to >>> | deploy them at all - easy or not). >>> >>> Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is >>> free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS. >> >> It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For >> ASP.Net hosted webservers, it sucks. >> >> > > > The fact that Micrsoft added code to SQL Everywhere to PREVENT it from First of all "CALM DOWN".> being used in an IIS process sucks! What about that don't you get? > The fact that you can't control SQL Express (due to the fact that you Moving SQL Express to SQL Server is a peice of cake. I don't see what the > usually don't control the HOSTED servers) and that you could get more data > into SQL Everywhere (or SQLite for that matter) simply by using the > available disk space than you do with most hosted website's db plans > (which will include hosted SQL Express servers) sucks! big unsolvable problem here is. - Sahil Malik [MVP] http://blah.winsmarts.com Show quote "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message news:ogbfg.1420$EX2.833@bignews5.bellsouth.net... > The fact that you can't control SQL Express (due to the fact that you > usually don't control the HOSTED servers) and that you could get more data > into SQL Everywhere (or SQLite for that matter) simply by using the > available disk space than you do with most hosted website's db plans > (which will include hosted SQL Express servers) sucks! > > The fact that MS has an edition of Mobile SQL that they are making > available for everything except IIS use sucks! > > The fact that Micrsoft added code to SQL Everywhere to PREVENT it from > being used in an IIS process sucks! What about that don't you get? > > Microsoft again makes a valiant run downfield with the ball.....only to > stop and sit on the 1 yard line. > > > "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:OrGZK8GhGHA.4080@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Okay .. why does SQL express suck? It doesn't suck .. !!! It runs on a >> full fledged SQL engine, sure deployment is a pain, but migrating to a >> fullblown SQL Server is relatively painless. >> >> >> Also, can you elaborate - >> >>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking >>>>compatability >>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". >> >> >> ? >> >> - Sahil Malik >> http://www.winsmarts.com >> http://blah.winsmarts.com >> >> >> >> >> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message >> news:mo7fg.66883$MM6.52917@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>> >>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:eE$gLoFhGHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking >>>>compatability >>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking". >>>> >>>> Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql >>>> query >>>> is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from >>>> your own >>>> host? >>> >>> Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed >>> him earlier today. >>> >>>> >>>> | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be >>>> able >>>> | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it >>>> to >>>> | deploy them at all - easy or not). >>>> >>>> Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is >>>> free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS. >>> >>> It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For >>> ASP.Net hosted webservers, it sucks. >>> >>> >> >> > > Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And frankly There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home > SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name > changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway. Edition, while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are targeting mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick to MSDE. Regards AHA .. good one !!
- Sahil Malik http://www.winsmarts.com http://blah.winsmarts.com Show quote "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message news:%23j9fctDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote: >> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And >> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these >> name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications >> anyway. > > There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home Edition, > while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are targeting > mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick to MSDE. > > Regards > Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote: This is not true. SQL Express runs under XP Home as well (at least it does > > There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home > Edition, while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are > targeting mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick > to MSDE. > > Regards > on my machine). However, it does not support remote connections by default. Thanks Sahil. I thought it did but did not have a rig here to test it with.
Of course even the home system could host SQL Server as a service if you throw the right switches. -- Show quote____________________________________ William (Bill) Vaughn Author, Mentor, Consultant Microsoft MVP INETA Speaker www.betav.com/blog/billva www.betav.com Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. __________________________________ "Jos Roijakkers" <j.roijakk***@qred-it.nl> wrote in message news:5d4a1f3de97e8c852fad9beee28@news.microsoft.com... >> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote: >> >> There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home >> Edition, while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are >> targeting mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick >> to MSDE. >> >> Regards >> > > This is not true. SQL Express runs under XP Home as well (at least it does > on my machine). However, it does not support remote connections by > default. > > On Tue, 30 May 2006 15:49:50 -0700, Frank Rizzo <n***@none.com> wrote:
>Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote: There are lots of places where an app that normally runs on high-end>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And frankly >> SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name >> changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway. > >There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home >Edition, while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are >targeting mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick to >MSDE. XP Pro machines would have to run on XP Home as well. Does this mean that applications must fit the common denominator: MSDE? I didn't think MSDE was still supported. And what about XP Media Center? I'd love to find out about future plans to adapt to MC and Home editions, assuming there is no way to target them now. SQL Express will run on XP Media center. Show quote "_DD" <_@nospam.com> wrote in message news:octr72ll2st47a5ocsnrohkfepa60karu4@4ax.com... > On Tue, 30 May 2006 15:49:50 -0700, Frank Rizzo <n***@none.com> wrote: > >>Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote: >>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And >>> frankly >>> SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name >>> changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway. >> >>There is one more Access advantage: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
