VB6 s/w to keep track in tournament
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: VSM 05/2002 Dan Fergus Article - Getting Debug Info from Production Apps
Next: Use Internet to network to VB5 app?
From: Tony Toews on 22 Jun 2010 21:34 On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:47:44 -0400, "mbyerley" <mDotByerley(a)VerizonDottieNettie> wrote: >Why don't you really tell us how you feel about Access? ;-) <chuckle> Took the words right out of my keyboard. Whereas I quite like Access. Oh well, to each his own. Tony
From: Tony Toews on 22 Jun 2010 21:38 On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:19:51 +0100, MM <kylix_is(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >Boy, was I wrong! Access is, if you're a VB programmer, a pile, a >veritable PILE of donkey poo. The UI is a royal PITA (compared to VB). >Nothing in the Access UI seems to function like you'd expect it to, >from the awful "switchboard" The MS supplied switchboard? That sucks. I never use it. Instead I use command buttons on unbound forms. >to the way that properties are presented non-alphabetically. So what. On the property sheet they are grouped reasonably well both in the individual tabs and in the All tab. I guess it's what you're used to. >Access can be your friend! But I wouldn't wish its application UI on >my worst enemy. I must say that this is one of the more eloquent and interestnig rants I've read in quite a while. Well done. (And I don't mean this sarcasticaly.) Tony (still chuckling)
From: Bob Butler on 22 Jun 2010 21:44 "Tony Toews" <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in message news:u4p226l07l3rhno2uqhjtvvc07dnhp4o77(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:19:51 +0100, MM <kylix_is(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>Boy, was I wrong! Access is, if you're a VB programmer, a pile, a >>veritable PILE of donkey poo. The UI is a royal PITA (compared to VB). >>Nothing in the Access UI seems to function like you'd expect it to, >>from the awful "switchboard" > > The MS supplied switchboard? That sucks. I never use it. Instead I > use command buttons on unbound forms. > >>to the way that properties are presented non-alphabetically. > > So what. On the property sheet they are grouped reasonably well both > in the individual tabs and in the All tab. I guess it's what you're > used to. > >>Access can be your friend! But I wouldn't wish its application UI on >>my worst enemy. > > I must say that this is one of the more eloquent and interestnig rants > I've read in quite a while. Well done. (And I don't mean this > sarcasticaly.) I don't remember hearing anybody who started with VB liking Access. With those who start in Access the opinions on moving to VB seem to be more diverse. I started with VB and the few times I've had to deal with Access I swore I'd never do it again. It's even worse than dotnet.
From: MikeD on 22 Jun 2010 22:09 "Tony Toews" <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in message news:u4p226l07l3rhno2uqhjtvvc07dnhp4o77(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:19:51 +0100, MM <kylix_is(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>Boy, was I wrong! Access is, if you're a VB programmer, a pile, a >>veritable PILE of donkey poo. The UI is a royal PITA (compared to VB). >>Nothing in the Access UI seems to function like you'd expect it to, >>from the awful "switchboard" > > The MS supplied switchboard? That sucks. I never use it. Instead I > use command buttons on unbound forms. > >>to the way that properties are presented non-alphabetically. > > So what. On the property sheet they are grouped reasonably well both > in the individual tabs and in the All tab. I guess it's what you're > used to. > >>Access can be your friend! But I wouldn't wish its application UI on >>my worst enemy. > > I must say that this is one of the more eloquent and interestnig rants > I've read in quite a while. Well done. (And I don't mean this > sarcasticaly.) > > Tony (still chuckling) Tony, the thing you gotta understand, and which you even mentioned elsewhere in this thread, is a person's background. Now here, in in this specific newsgroup, MOST people are going to have a VB6 background. Therefore, we're partial to VB6. You, on the other hand, have an Access background, so naturally you're partial to Access. However, most of us VB6ers would never use Access for anything more than serving as the backend database for a local database app (a movie, music database, for example...or another way to put it, a "home" application). My initial reply to you (in which I said I thought using Access was a terrible suggestion), which kinda started this, was based on Saga saying "a VB6 app", that Saga has been around on the VB6 newsgroups for awhile and to my recollection has never even mentioned development in Access, and that he posted to a VB6 newsgroup and NOT an Access newsgroup (he probably would have posted to an Access ng if he wanted to use Access). Taking all this into consideration, plus a few more things, my opinion was that your suggestion to use Access was not a good one. I didn't mean to start this debate though. -- Mike
From: Kevin Provance on 22 Jun 2010 23:10
"Tony Toews" <ttoews(a)telusplanet.net> wrote in message news:u4p226l07l3rhno2uqhjtvvc07dnhp4o77(a)4ax.com... : : I must say that this is one of the more eloquent and interestnig rants : I've read in quite a while. Well done. (And I don't mean this : sarcasticaly.) : : Tony (still chuckling) Basically, what Mike said. Look at where you are. We are Classic VB cheerleaders, not Access cheerleaders. You're only here because of the VBA part of it (or so I am gathering). I used Access (the backend) once when working with an internal app to store customer info, and that was a PITA. I've seen the Access program and it's nothing I would want to mess with. To be fair, I worked with a guy who was a bloody Access wizard who did things with Access I never thought possible. He, like you dismissed VB away with a single hand...so I'm not surprised at the loyalty factor involved. If I had it to do over again, I would go with the ADO route, or a third party called Cheetah for databasing. Or god forbid XML. There are some things about working with the XML DOM that are amazing simple. Combine that with VB as a front end, and it's a nice system. Then having the SAX option for larger XML files, it's all nicely rounded. But again, that's not for corporate use...just me in my own personal usage. |