Is Anyone Still Using Access For Web Development Anymore?

Go To StackoverFlow.com

1

Yes, I know, you are all cringing in horror. Back in the day I got my start writing internal apps with classic ASP and MS Access. I'm writing a small marketing app, and I recently got denied access to our SQL Server. So I was looking for alternatives. There will be very little data input, mostly just reading static data. I've heard there are decent alternatives out there like SQLite or Sybase SQL Anywhere web. I guess my question is...

Is Access even considered feasible now?

If not, what file based db alternatives are available?

Thanks for your input.

2009-06-16 19:41
by infocyde
Dear IT department: there will be massive layoffs in IT, due to our poor performance. We had some great ideas to increase sales, but our marketing department was denied the IT resources necessary to implement them - Jon B 2009-06-16 19:54
+1 for "cringing in horror" - scunliffe 2009-06-17 01:18
The question is nonsense, given that you can't use Access for web development. You can use JET, but not ACCESS - David-W-Fenton 2009-06-17 02:41
@David W. Fenton: not this again. You are behind the times. When MSFT released Access2007, Microsoft started using the term Access database engine to collectively refer to the old Jet engine (mdb format) and the new ACE engine (accdb). But since forever Access has been an synonym for Jet, not just colloquially and informally but in official documentation (e.g. MSDN) and products (e.g. the old odbc driver was named Access, rather than Jet, by Microsoft) - onedaywhen 2009-06-17 05:49


7

A little thing called MySQL, unless you are absolutely positively sure that it will be single user in which case, SQLite is great, but you did say web development, so I wouldn't recommend it.

And no, using MS Access does not make sense anymore.

A 15-second guide to getting started with MySQL and ASP. (note it's a little old, but I am pretty sure it is a good start) Alternatively, this google search brings up a plethora of other tutorials.

2009-06-16 19:45
by cgp
Thanks for the quick answer. I doubt MySQL would fly (too bad because I'd like to play with that some more). I started fooling around creating tables in and access file and just messing with the Access UI now (haven't played with it to much since about 2000) is a pain in the rear. I guess maybe I'll just prototype the think in SQL Server on my local box, and try to push for SQL Server access again once the stake holders see the value add (to use corporate speak). Since you were the first answer, you get the check. Thanks again all who took the time to write - infocyde 2009-06-16 20:04


7

Try SQL Server Express which is cheaper than access since it is free

2009-06-16 19:46
by SQLMenace
I thought about that, but you have to have sql server express on the server, which in this instance might not fly either. Good thought though, SQL Express would work great in this instance - infocyde 2009-06-16 20:06


5

You could use XML files with LINQ, which would give you the ability to query the information, which might be a little easier than messing with Access.

Just a suggestion because you said it was mostly static information with little changes. SQL would be much better though :)

2009-06-16 19:48
by Hugoware
Ha, thinking outside the box - infocyde 2009-06-16 20:08
Not really a bad plan. I'd vote Linq To Objects with XmlSerialization for persistence. It's not as bad as it sounds and you can avoid diving into the xml side of things directly - Wyatt Barnett 2009-06-16 20:12


3

"I [was] denied access to our SQL Server." -- gotta love internal politics!

2009-06-16 19:46
by Larry K


3

This Article has several answers about using SQL Server .mdf files. You may only need some dll for run-time or SQL Server Lite/compact/Free edition installed on server.

2009-06-16 19:57
by JeffO
Yep, Add... New Item... SQL Database - Adds an mdb file to the App_Data folder and sets up a file based connection string. No need for anything else to be installed on the server - Zhaph - Ben Duguid 2009-06-17 13:10


1

Unfortunately, yes. We all hate it here, but it's what we are stuck with at the moment for certain apps.

Really, I wouldn't consider using it. There are a ton of better alternatives. Even SQL Desktop Edition will get you more bang for your buck.

2009-06-16 19:44
by kemiller2002


1

Sadly, it is still being used but not nearly as much for new projects. MySQL is free and open source so it is easily taking the place of Access.

2009-06-16 19:46
by Tom


1

I would definitely recommend that you try SQLite. It has much of the power of a full-blown relational database, and is file-based.

Here is a description from aspfree.com: Using SQLite for Simple Database Access

2009-06-16 19:47
by Brian Ramsay
I've heard good things about SQLite. Might play with that and see where it gets me, though from what I read there are locking/concurrency issues, just not as bad as with Access - infocyde 2009-06-16 20:07


1

It's much easier to setup remotely - when you don't have any access to the machine's desktop.

2009-06-16 19:48
by Ian Boyd


1

A couple of years ago I worked for a Fortune 100 company that had a copy of a massive Access database application at each manufacturing site (around 125 of them in the particular business unit I worked for). Every month each site would e-mail their database to the application proprietor, who would manually merge their data to produce the "Big Report."

My assignment was to migrate the back end to a centralized MS SQL Server, but LEAVE THE APP IN ACCESS. I kid you not. They wanted an Access front end married to a centralized SQL Server database. No amount of convincing would dissuade them. I did it, took my paycheck, and moved on. So, yes, there are still folks out there who use Access, but I really can't think of any situation when it's a good idea.

As a previous poster said, try the Express Edition of MS SQL Server. It is a far more powerful, multi-user database that is free.

2009-06-16 20:10
by breitak67
Were they really interested in leaving it in Access (If so what was the reason?) or did they just want to avoid taking the time/money to build the app in something else? If it works.. - JeffO 2009-06-17 01:20
What does your story have to do with the question? You're talking about Access with a non-web application, i.e., as front end to SQL Server. The question is about Jet (not Access, despite the OP's misstatement of his question) as back end for web development. Your comment is not really an answer, and it's not on-topic, either - David-W-Fenton 2009-06-17 02:44
@Guiness:They brought in an Access developer and re-wrote the front end at the same time - breitak67 2009-06-22 12:03


1

Access, being both the database engine (formerly known as Jet) plus its 'management studio' and the forms-based RAD development platform plus its IDE, is good for some things (must be so because it still sells well, I'm told). It's hard to argue against it being great for rapid prototyping of forms based applications; about the worst thing you can say is that it has its only way of doing things so skills aren't transferable too well. As a stand-alone it's not so great because its implementation of SQL deviates from the SQL Standard in many ways, again non-transferable skills (you have to 'un-learn' Access's way of working). But for web development, I don't think you will get too many recommendations. The regulars here on SO who still advocate Access seem to be absent in terms of answers recommending it for ASP in this thread and that speaks volumes for me!

2009-06-17 06:04
by onedaywhen


1

Jon,

I would go back and revisit the Sybase SQL Anywhere for the web option. If you are writing web based applications, the new licensing model for SQL Anywhere 11 allows for free production use of their database as long as it is only be touched by a browser based app. Also, the developer version of SQL Anywhere 11 is free as well. I've been using SQL Anywhere/ASA/Watcom SQL since the version 4 days. It is an incredible database and can handle most anything you want to throw at it. We use it for different commerical applications, and I wouldn't use anything else. It's just that good!

HTH.

Jeff

2009-06-19 16:47
by Jeff Gibson
Ads