Re: Database Connectivity

Discussion in 'Python' started by Aaron Bingham, Oct 5, 2004.

  1. Sandeep Avinash Gohad wrote:

    >
    >Hi
    >
    >I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with python.
    >I want to use MS Access as a backend.
    >Please guide me....
    >If any e-books,links available particularly for database connectivity
    >then please let me know
    >
    >Regards
    >Sandeep
    >
    >

    First, consider if you really want to use MS Access for this. In my
    experience, this is mostly asking for trouble as Access is poorly
    documented and has many bugs and misfeatures you will waste your time
    working around. In addition, Access DBs are prone to corruption if
    accessed by many users at once. PostgreSQL is a much more powerful
    alternative, and version 8.0, coming soon, will run natively on
    Windows. Of course, it is not as "user friendly" in the sense of having
    pretty GUI tools, but since it sounds like you will be writing the GUI
    in Python anyway, this may not matter.

    If you are going to use Access, Python Programming on Win32 by Mark
    Hammond and Andy Robinson is an essential reference.

    Aaron
     
    Aaron Bingham, Oct 5, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Aaron Bingham

    Larry Bates Guest

    Aaron Bingham wrote:
    > Sandeep Avinash Gohad wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Hi
    >>
    >> I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with python.
    >> I want to use MS Access as a backend.
    >> Please guide me....
    >> If any e-books,links available particularly for database connectivity
    >> then please let me know
    >>
    >> Regards
    >> Sandeep
    >>
    >>

    > First, consider if you really want to use MS Access for this. In my
    > experience, this is mostly asking for trouble as Access is poorly
    > documented and has many bugs and misfeatures you will waste your time
    > working around. In addition, Access DBs are prone to corruption if
    > accessed by many users at once. PostgreSQL is a much more powerful
    > alternative, and version 8.0, coming soon, will run natively on
    > Windows. Of course, it is not as "user friendly" in the sense of having
    > pretty GUI tools, but since it sounds like you will be writing the GUI
    > in Python anyway, this may not matter.
    >
    > If you are going to use Access, Python Programming on Win32 by Mark
    > Hammond and Andy Robinson is an essential reference.
    >
    > Aaron
    >

    I wrote and contributed a DAO interface class that I've used to
    read/write data from/to Access databases located here:

    http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python/Recipe/303349

    Larry Bates
     
    Larry Bates, Oct 5, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. I would recommend using firebird RDBMS on windows not access, youre heading
    for trouble

    to make firebird adoption easier use a gui from IBPHOENIX.com

    Hope this helps

    "Aaron Bingham" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Sandeep Avinash Gohad wrote:
    >
    >> Hi
    >>
    >>I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with python.
    >>I want to use MS Access as a backend.
    >>Please guide me....
    >>If any e-books,links available particularly for database connectivity
    >>then please let me know
    >>
    >>Regards
    >>Sandeep
    >>

    > First, consider if you really want to use MS Access for this. In my
    > experience, this is mostly asking for trouble as Access is poorly
    > documented and has many bugs and misfeatures you will waste your time
    > working around. In addition, Access DBs are prone to corruption if
    > accessed by many users at once. PostgreSQL is a much more powerful
    > alternative, and version 8.0, coming soon, will run natively on Windows.
    > Of course, it is not as "user friendly" in the sense of having pretty GUI
    > tools, but since it sounds like you will be writing the GUI in Python
    > anyway, this may not matter.
    >
    > If you are going to use Access, Python Programming on Win32 by Mark
    > Hammond and Andy Robinson is an essential reference.
    >
    > Aaron
    >
     
    Graeme Matthew, Oct 6, 2004
    #3
  4. On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 15:06:18 +0200, Aaron Bingham
    <> declaimed the following in
    comp.lang.python:

    Pardon the nesting -- I missed the original, and it seems
    unavailable via my client...

    > Sandeep Avinash Gohad wrote:
    > >I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with python.
    > >I want to use MS Access as a backend.


    Access, itself, is merely a GUI builder front-end. You are
    likely using M$ JET as the database engine.

    > accessed by many users at once. PostgreSQL is a much more powerful
    > alternative, and version 8.0, coming soon, will run natively on
    > Windows. Of course, it is not as "user friendly" in the sense of having
    > pretty GUI tools, but since it sounds like you will be writing the GUI
    > in Python anyway, this may not matter.


    Other options: If one doesn't need full capabilities (just data
    tables and selects), MySQL... The former SAP-DB, now packaged as "MaxDB
    by MySQL"... An off-shoot of Interbase 6, Firebird.

    --
    > ============================================================== <
    > | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG <
    > | Bestiaria Support Staff <
    > ============================================================== <
    > Home Page: <http://www.dm.net/~wulfraed/> <
    > Overflow Page: <http://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/> <
     
    Dennis Lee Bieber, Oct 6, 2004
    #4
  5. On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:48:40AM +0000, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
    > [somebody wants to base a Python application on JET]
    >
    > Other options: If one doesn't need full capabilities (just data tables and
    > selects), MySQL... The former SAP-DB, now packaged as "MaxDB by MySQL"... An
    > off-shoot of Interbase 6, Firebird.


    Or just PySQLite, then you won't need to install any servers, and have an
    almost equally powerful SQL engine. Well, more powerful than MySQL IMO, but
    that's not hard :p

    -- Gerhard
     
    Gerhard Haering, Oct 6, 2004
    #5
  6. Dennis Lee Bieber <> wrote:
    ...
    > > >I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with python.
    > > >I want to use MS Access as a backend.

    >
    > Access, itself, is merely a GUI builder front-end. You are
    > likely using M$ JET as the database engine.


    Amen! People keep making this mistake over and over and over again.
    Access is a product Microsoft sells; Jet is one they give away for free;
    etc, etc -- how CAN it be so hard to distinguish?!


    > > accessed by many users at once. PostgreSQL is a much more powerful
    > > alternative, and version 8.0, coming soon, will run natively on
    > > Windows. Of course, it is not as "user friendly" in the sense of having
    > > pretty GUI tools, but since it sounds like you will be writing the GUI
    > > in Python anyway, this may not matter.

    >
    > Other options: If one doesn't need full capabilities (just data
    > tables and selects), MySQL... The former SAP-DB, now packaged as "MaxDB
    > by MySQL"... An off-shoot of Interbase 6, Firebird.


    ....and if one MUST use a Microsoft engine (in some workplaces that's a
    political necessity, disgusting as it may be), *at least* use MSDE, the
    "Microsoft Data Engine" -- freely downloadable and redistributable
    version (without GUI chrome) of the MS SQL Server small edition
    (designed for no more than 5 connections at a time -- still better than
    Jet, designed [if that's the word] for no more than _1_, ideally 0;-).
    [[I believe you need a license of MS VStudio, Office, or other such
    products, to enjoy the free license to MSDE legally -- check the details
    out on Microsoft's site]]. MSDE may not be anywhere as good as the
    others you're listing, but it sure beats Jet hands down!


    Alex
     
    Alex Martelli, Oct 6, 2004
    #6
  7. On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 04:48:40 GMT, Dennis Lee Bieber
    <> declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:

    Talking to myself... <G>
    >
    > Access, itself, is merely a GUI builder front-end. You are
    > likely using M$ JET as the database engine.
    >

    "Likely" as the newer Access versions (Office2000+) can be used
    as a front-end for M$ SQL Server/MSDE (I can't recall if MSDE was
    supplied with O2000 Premium, it was with VB6 Pro).

    (MSDE being sort of a single-user SQL Server development engine --
    limited to ~2GB per database, like JET is, and to only 5 concurrent
    queries)

    --
    > ============================================================== <
    > | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG <
    > | Bestiaria Support Staff <
    > ============================================================== <
    > Home Page: <http://www.dm.net/~wulfraed/> <
    > Overflow Page: <http://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/> <
     
    Dennis Lee Bieber, Oct 6, 2004
    #7
  8. Aaron Bingham

    David Bolen Guest

    Dennis Lee Bieber <> writes:

    > On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 04:48:40 GMT, Dennis Lee Bieber
    > <> declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
    >
    > Talking to myself... <G>
    > >
    > > Access, itself, is merely a GUI builder front-end. You are
    > > likely using M$ JET as the database engine.
    > >

    > "Likely" as the newer Access versions (Office2000+) can be used
    > as a front-end for M$ SQL Server/MSDE (I can't recall if MSDE was
    > supplied with O2000 Premium, it was with VB6 Pro).
    >
    > (MSDE being sort of a single-user SQL Server development engine --
    > limited to ~2GB per database, like JET is, and to only 5 concurrent
    > queries)


    If I recall correctly, it's not actually limited to 5 concurrent
    connections, but there is a performance limiter that kicks in after
    that point to slow it down :)

    But it has something to do with active requests, so I believe you
    could have any number of connections, and probably not hit performance
    issues unless more than 5 of them were actively trying to do something
    at the same time.

    -- David
     
    David Bolen, Oct 6, 2004
    #8
  9. On 06 Oct 2004 13:39:15 -0400, David Bolen <> declaimed
    the following in comp.lang.python:

    > Dennis Lee Bieber <> writes:
    >


    > > limited to ~2GB per database, like JET is, and to only 5 concurrent
    > > queries)

    >
    > If I recall correctly, it's not actually limited to 5 concurrent
    > connections, but there is a performance limiter that kicks in after
    > that point to slow it down :)
    >

    I did say "queries", not "connections"... <G>

    --
    > ============================================================== <
    > | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG <
    > | Bestiaria Support Staff <
    > ============================================================== <
    > Home Page: <http://www.dm.net/~wulfraed/> <
    > Overflow Page: <http://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/> <
     
    Dennis Lee Bieber, Oct 7, 2004
    #9
  10. On 06 Oct 2004 13:39:15 -0400, David Bolen <> declaimed
    the following in comp.lang.python:

    Pardon the repeat... Addendum comment at bottom...

    > Dennis Lee Bieber <> writes:
    >


    > > limited to ~2GB per database, like JET is, and to only 5 concurrent
    > > queries)

    >
    > If I recall correctly, it's not actually limited to 5 concurrent
    > connections, but there is a performance limiter that kicks in after
    > that point to slow it down :)
    >

    I did say "queries", not "connections"... <G>

    -------------

    Just hit M$ download page... Looks like they may have changed
    the limitations between the old MSDE that came with my VB6-Pro package
    and the current one. The download info describes it as 25 connections.

    Now if M$ could just get their name straight... Even they seem
    unsure of what MSDE is short for: I've seen both short "Microsoft (SQL)
    Data Engine" and "Microsoft SQL-server Desktop Edition"

    --
    > ============================================================== <
    > | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG <
    > | Bestiaria Support Staff <
    > ============================================================== <
    > Home Page: <http://www.dm.net/~wulfraed/> <
    > Overflow Page: <http://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/> <
     
    Dennis Lee Bieber, Oct 9, 2004
    #10
  11. Alex Martelli wrote:
    > Dennis Lee Bieber <> wrote:
    > ...
    >
    >>>>I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with python.
    >>>>I want to use MS Access as a backend.

    >>
    >> Access, itself, is merely a GUI builder front-end. You are
    >>likely using M$ JET as the database engine.

    >
    >
    > Amen! People keep making this mistake over and over and over again.
    > Access is a product Microsoft sells; Jet is one they give away for free;
    > etc, etc -- how CAN it be so hard to distinguish?!


    How can it be so hard to distinguish?

    Gee - how about - cuz M$ doesn't bother telling you? It *says* M$ Access
    - right there on the package and on the computer. It doesn't say M$
    Jet... I used M$ Access for years, even took classes in it, did some
    pretty kewl stuff with it. Never was Jet mentioned anywhere at anytime.
    I found out from a geek buddy by accident one day...

    BTW: I just did a google check:

    the Product Overview page for M$ Access 2003 doesn't mention Jet once!
    http://www.microsoft.com/office/access/prodinfo/overview.mspx

    Nor does the Data Access and Storage Developer Center page!
    http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/Default.aspx

    and it ain't just M$. I found a lovely page called AccesSolutions:
    Microsoft Access Database Solutions, with not a single mention of Jet.

    In other words, if you didn't already *know*, you're damned unlikely to
    find out until some "real" database geek gives you a hard time about not
    knowing.


    Anna
     
    Anna Martelli Ravenscroft, Oct 10, 2004
    #11
  12. Anna Martelli Ravenscroft wrote:
    > Alex Martelli wrote:
    >
    >> Dennis Lee Bieber <> wrote:
    >> ...
    >>
    >>>>> I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with python.
    >>>>> I want to use MS Access as a backend.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Access, itself, is merely a GUI builder front-end. You are
    >>> likely using M$ JET as the database engine.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Amen! People keep making this mistake over and over and over again.
    >> Access is a product Microsoft sells; Jet is one they give away for free;
    >> etc, etc -- how CAN it be so hard to distinguish?!

    >
    >
    > How can it be so hard to distinguish?
    >
    > Gee - how about - cuz M$ doesn't bother telling you? It *says* M$ Access
    > - right there on the package and on the computer. It doesn't say M$
    > Jet... I used M$ Access for years, even took classes in it, did some
    > pretty kewl stuff with it. Never was Jet mentioned anywhere at anytime.
    > I found out from a geek buddy by accident one day...
    >
    > BTW: I just did a google check:
    >
    > the Product Overview page for M$ Access 2003 doesn't mention Jet once!
    > http://www.microsoft.com/office/access/prodinfo/overview.mspx
    >
    > Nor does the Data Access and Storage Developer Center page!
    > http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/Default.aspx
    >
    > and it ain't just M$. I found a lovely page called AccesSolutions:
    > Microsoft Access Database Solutions, with not a single mention of Jet.
    >
    > In other words, if you didn't already *know*, you're damned unlikely to
    > find out until some "real" database geek gives you a hard time about not
    > knowing.
    >
    >
    > Anna


    Just to follow up on this - I think this is another case of M$ evility.
    They *like* that people think of Access as a database - cuz if people
    realized that they could use another database, they might realize they
    could also use *another* front end.

    So, I really don't think it's deliberate blurring of the lines by the
    *users* of M$ Access, so much as by M$, and the poor users simply don't
    know any better.

    I want to emphasize that I understand how frustrating it is to keep
    coming across the same myths and misunderstandings, and that c.l.py is
    great for gently pointing out the real information to folks.

    Anna
     
    Anna Martelli Ravenscroft, Oct 10, 2004
    #12
  13. On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:47:29 GMT, Anna Martelli Ravenscroft
    <> declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:


    > Just to follow up on this - I think this is another case of M$ evility.
    > They *like* that people think of Access as a database - cuz if people
    > realized that they could use another database, they might realize they
    > could also use *another* front end.
    >

    Actually, since Office2000, Access can be used as a front end to
    M$ SQL Server/MSDE -- that's the difference between an "Access database"
    and an "Access project", the project is just the forms handling, with
    the database MSDE/SQL Server.


    --
    > ============================================================== <
    > | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG <
    > | Bestiaria Support Staff <
    > ============================================================== <
    > Home Page: <http://www.dm.net/~wulfraed/> <
    > Overflow Page: <http://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/> <
     
    Dennis Lee Bieber, Oct 11, 2004
    #13
  14. Aaron Bingham

    R Baumann Guest

    "Anna Martelli Ravenscroft" <> wrote in message
    news:Bdhad.18298$...
    > Anna Martelli Ravenscroft wrote:
    > > Alex Martelli wrote:
    > >
    > >> Dennis Lee Bieber <> wrote:
    > >> ...
    > >>
    > >>>>> I want to develope a simple Database connectivity program with

    python.
    > >>>>> I want to use MS Access as a backend.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> Access, itself, is merely a GUI builder front-end. You are
    > >>> likely using M$ JET as the database engine.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Amen! People keep making this mistake over and over and over again.
    > >> Access is a product Microsoft sells; Jet is one they give away for

    free;
    > >> etc, etc -- how CAN it be so hard to distinguish?!

    > >
    > >
    > > How can it be so hard to distinguish?
    > >
    > > Gee - how about - cuz M$ doesn't bother telling you? It *says* M$ Access
    > > - right there on the package and on the computer. It doesn't say M$
    > > Jet... I used M$ Access for years, even took classes in it, did some
    > > pretty kewl stuff with it. Never was Jet mentioned anywhere at anytime.
    > > I found out from a geek buddy by accident one day...
    > >
    > > BTW: I just did a google check:
    > >
    > > the Product Overview page for M$ Access 2003 doesn't mention Jet once!
    > > http://www.microsoft.com/office/access/prodinfo/overview.mspx
    > >
    > > Nor does the Data Access and Storage Developer Center page!
    > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/Default.aspx
    > >
    > > and it ain't just M$. I found a lovely page called AccesSolutions:
    > > Microsoft Access Database Solutions, with not a single mention of Jet.
    > >
    > > In other words, if you didn't already *know*, you're damned unlikely to
    > > find out until some "real" database geek gives you a hard time about not
    > > knowing.
    > >
    > >
    > > Anna

    >
    > Just to follow up on this - I think this is another case of M$ evility.
    > They *like* that people think of Access as a database - cuz if people
    > realized that they could use another database, they might realize they
    > could also use *another* front end.
    >
    > So, I really don't think it's deliberate blurring of the lines by the
    > *users* of M$ Access, so much as by M$, and the poor users simply don't
    > know any better.
    >
    > I want to emphasize that I understand how frustrating it is to keep
    > coming across the same myths and misunderstandings, and that c.l.py is
    > great for gently pointing out the real information to folks.
    >
    > Anna


    I'm a database geek. I make damn good money developing and maintaining
    database apps. And in the corporate world, a database of some sort is
    pretty well THE application they're concerned with. And, since c.l.py is so
    great for GENTLY pointing out the real information to folks here's the real
    scoop on ms-access...

    1. Since version 1, ms-access has ALWAYS been two products, the Access
    front end, and the underlying database engine, JET. Since Access has always
    been sold as a single product, the JET database engine has just naturally
    been referred to as the "Access database engine". Technically wrong, but
    it's just easier to think of it that way. BTW, JET technology is the
    current underlying database for windows itself when it needs to use a db.
    (XP only I think. This may change when longhorn is released).

    The original purpose of Access, and in many cases still is, was to be a
    Desktop Database that made it easy for a non-programmer user to create and
    maintain their own simple contact lists, address books, etc and be able to
    create and run reports against those db's. And that worked and still works
    really well for that aspect. Developers got hold of the product, realized
    they had a real good opportunity, and for years have been making a good
    living from Access. Many of the upgrades that have come from Access through
    the years have been due to developer efforts working with Microsoft.
    Thousands and thousands of custom data base apps have been written using
    Access, some using the JET engine, some using another DB engine altogether,
    like SQL Server, Sybase, MySQL, etc.

    2. Access is a total RAD programming environment that is optimized to do
    ONE thing very well, build and manage databases, although it can be used to
    do other things as well. Access has ALWAYS had Forms, A query writer, table
    management, database creation, a report writer(MUCH better than Crystal
    IMO), and as a built-in language for getting down to the "metal" when you
    have to, Visual Basic for Applications.

    Yeah, yeah, I've heard it all before. BASIC ugh!, Not a real language,
    etc., etc., etc. If BASIC is not a real language, why do so many languages,
    including Python have more similiarities than differences to it? This is a
    fair question.

    And this is MY OPINION! MY answer is that BASIC, with all it's perceived
    bad aspects is very easy to learn and understand. An experienced BASIC
    professional programmer can do one hell'uva good job, and the code won't
    look like spaghetti, and probably the app will be released into production
    with fewer errors, and much faster than a C/C++ programmer could make it
    happen. And as far as writing spaghetti code, huh!, you can do that in ANY
    language, goto's or not, structured programming techniques or not.

    3. When Access 2000 was released, MS included a version of MS-SQL Server
    called the MSDE(Microsoft Database Engine) that was a deliberately
    watered-down version of MS-SQL Server 7. By watered down, I mean that MSDE
    could handle up to 5 concurrent PROCESSES before a governor kicked in to
    deliberately slow things down. This was to prevent MSDE being used in areas
    where an industrial strength DB Server needs to be used. A marketing issue?
    You bet. But, MSDE has been know to work very reliably in small user LANS,
    and workgroups of up to about 25 users with a medium to somewhat heavy
    workload. And, if the workload is fairly light up into the hundreds. If
    the workload is light, OR, ESPECIALLY if the developer knows what they're
    doing, the governor won't kick in that often. Processes can be made to be
    efficient. Unless you're a huge corporation with hundreds or thousands of
    users, this is more than good enough to handle most small companies, and if
    those companies grow larger, the upgrade path to full blown SQL Server is
    just a simple step to attach the tables from MSDE to SQL Server.

    <GASP!> M$ sells stuff for money! Why not? I like to eat, you like to
    eat. Don't like Microsoft?, sounds like a personal problem to me. I don't
    like everything they do either, but to pay my salary, the company I work for
    has to make money, not live on indignant or righteous attitudes. I use
    whatever works best for the particular customer I have to work with. If MS
    has a product that does what I need it to, I'll use it. If Python is a
    better way to do things, I'll use it, if QBasic, if Delphi, if...

    4. Don't like SQL Server? use ODBC. I've done Access apps using Btrieve,
    MySql, Interbase/Firebird and others as the backend data engine, and Access
    as the GUI front end. My development time in Access is 1/3 to 1/2 the time,
    and with fewer errors.

    5. JET is no longer being actively enhanced. It IS being maintained.
    Eventually it will fade away, but the MSDE will still be there. Access is
    now up to version 2003 just in case anyone is interested. MSDE is up to
    version 2000 or perhaps more by now. It's a free download from the MS
    website. There ARE some licensing issues, so pay attention to them if you
    download. Not everything in the world has to be or should be "free" or
    "open source".

    Don't get me wrong. I love the idea of Open Source. I make use of it quite
    often. My problem with it is when the primary developer gets tired of the
    project, which often happens after a year or two, it generally dies because
    no-one is interested in taking over, or the project stagnates. MS never
    said they were in business to produce free or open source software, and at
    least they don't let their products stagnate. It takes money to build and
    maintain a Word, or an Excel, or an Access, and sometimes I absolutely need
    to use a product I know is going to be around a while, and be supported.

    6. Finally, MS is positioning Access to be a GUI front-end to any database,
    and the hooks are already there. Look for a .NET version in the future.

    Sorry about the long rant, but so much mis-information has been passed along
    in this thread and in past threads, mainly due to so much MS hatred,
    deserved or not, that I felt I had to speak up. I get the impression that
    most of the info comes from people parroting other people, and not really
    knowing about the products that they are dis'ing. If you're really
    interested in seeing what Access CAN do, take a look in particular at the
    following newsgroup:

    comp.databases.ms-access.

    Also look at the Microsoft Public Access newsgroups. They all offer help
    and information, some better, some worse, and sometimes it's even done as
    gently and correctly as in c.l.py.

    RB
     
    R Baumann, Oct 11, 2004
    #14
  15. Aaron Bingham

    Ville Vainio Guest

    >>>>> "Baumann" == R Baumann <> writes:

    Baumann> <GASP!> M$ sells stuff for money! Why not? I like to
    Baumann> eat, you like to eat. Don't like Microsoft?, sounds like
    Baumann> a personal problem to me. I don't

    I know I'm treading highly flammable waters here, but dislike of a
    company is not necessarily a purely personal problem (making the
    assumption that ethics means something for the purpose of this
    discussion). Making money is not a problem, it's *how* they make the
    money (or more correctly, prevent others from making money) that irks
    some people, including me.

    Baumann> like everything they do either, but to pay my salary, the
    Baumann> company I work for has to make money, not live on
    Baumann> indignant or righteous attitudes. I use whatever works
    Baumann> best for the particular customer I have to work with. If

    Yes, we all need to make some concessions to make a living. If you are
    paid to sell cigarettes and the alternative is going without a job,
    you sell cigarettes. Where people draw the line is determined by their
    individual (irrational) hangups like principles and ethics. Still, I
    generally try not to ridicule people that have higher moral standards
    than me.

    Of course an individal developer has very little power to decide these
    things in the first place, so no drawing a line is necessary.

    --
    Ville Vainio http://tinyurl.com/2prnb
     
    Ville Vainio, Oct 11, 2004
    #15
  16. Aaron Bingham

    Cliff Wells Guest

    On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 11:17 -0700, R Baumann wrote:

    <snip stuff I don't disagree with>

    > 3. When Access 2000 was released, MS included a version of MS-SQL Server
    > called the MSDE(Microsoft Database Engine) that was a deliberately
    > watered-down version of MS-SQL Server 7. By watered down, I mean that MSDE
    > could handle up to 5 concurrent PROCESSES before a governor kicked in to
    > deliberately slow things down. This was to prevent MSDE being used in areas
    > where an industrial strength DB Server needs to be used. A marketing issue?
    > You bet. But, MSDE has been know to work very reliably in small user LANS,
    > and workgroups of up to about 25 users with a medium to somewhat heavy
    > workload. And, if the workload is fairly light up into the hundreds. If
    > the workload is light, OR, ESPECIALLY if the developer knows what they're
    > doing, the governor won't kick in that often. Processes can be made to be
    > efficient. Unless you're a huge corporation with hundreds or thousands of
    > users, this is more than good enough to handle most small companies, and if
    > those companies grow larger, the upgrade path to full blown SQL Server is
    > just a simple step to attach the tables from MSDE to SQL Server.


    But the question remains: why use a "watered down" version of a
    database, or pay for an "industrial-strength" version of it when there
    are free alternatives that actually surpass both versions?

    > <GASP!> M$ sells stuff for money! Why not? I like to eat, you like to
    > eat. Don't like Microsoft?, sounds like a personal problem to me.


    Frankly your entire rant sounds like a personal problem.

    > I don't
    > like everything they do either, but to pay my salary, the company I work for
    > has to make money, not live on indignant or righteous attitudes. I use
    > whatever works best for the particular customer I have to work with.


    Reasonable attitude. Despite being a Linux afficianado, I still
    recommend Windows for most user's desktops, simply because there isn't
    enough payoff to justify the learning curve for most people were they to
    switch. Linux has major advantages over Windows in many areas, but the
    desktop currently isn't one of them.

    > If MS
    > has a product that does what I need it to, I'll use it. If Python is a
    > better way to do things, I'll use it, if QBasic, if Delphi, if...


    You'll use QBasic? And where will you get it from? I point this out
    simply to highlight your apparent blindness to Microsoft's abandonment
    of actively used tools (which you cite later as a reason to prefer MS
    over open source projects).

    > 4. Don't like SQL Server? use ODBC. I've done Access apps using Btrieve,
    > MySql, Interbase/Firebird and others as the backend data engine, and Access
    > as the GUI front end. My development time in Access is 1/3 to 1/2 the time,
    > and with fewer errors.


    1/3 to 1/2 the time of what and with fewer errors than what? And when
    you've specified that, for what complexity of the previously
    unmentioned? Access, VB, and, in fact, most "RAD" development tools
    work best with simple applications. Their friendliness and simplicity
    quite often become a liability for more complex applications. It's been
    a few years since I was forced to use Access, but as I recall, it wasn't
    even possible to design forms (dialogs) with dynamic layout using those
    tools. Quite frankly I doubt there is much to be gained in development
    time with using Access over a combination of Python, PostgreSQL and
    wxPython/Tk or even a web interface. But I don't doubt the lack of
    flexibility one would incur with that choice.

    > 5. JET is no longer being actively enhanced. It IS being maintained.
    > Eventually it will fade away, but the MSDE will still be there. Access is
    > now up to version 2003 just in case anyone is interested. MSDE is up to
    > version 2000 or perhaps more by now. It's a free download from the MS
    > website. There ARE some licensing issues, so pay attention to them if you
    > download.


    JET will fade away. Gasp! Yet another MS technology that won't be
    around?

    > Not everything in the world has to be or should be "free" or
    > "open source".


    Agreed. But when it's already there, and it's superior to the
    commercial version, why wouldn't you use it? Bigotry?

    > Don't get me wrong. I love the idea of Open Source. I make use of it quite
    > often. My problem with it is when the primary developer gets tired of the
    > project, which often happens after a year or two, it generally dies because
    > no-one is interested in taking over, or the project stagnates. MS never
    > said they were in business to produce free or open source software, and at
    > least they don't let their products stagnate. It takes money to build and
    > maintain a Word, or an Excel, or an Access, and sometimes I absolutely need
    > to use a product I know is going to be around a while, and be supported.


    PostgreSQL (started around 1986 as a research project, moved to its
    current open-source status around 1995 [also when SQL support was
    added]) has certainly been around at least as long as the equivalent
    Microsoft products (SQL Server was released around 1989 on OS/2, 1992 on
    Windows), so I fail to see your point here. Also, holding Microsoft up
    as an example of a company that supports its own products for extended
    periods of time is probably ill-advised. The original version of SQL
    Server doesn't exist in any incarnation, nor does Microsoft support the
    OS it ran on (OS/2), despite having hyped it as the next major PC
    platform. In fact, the current version of SQL Server is a complete
    rewrite that actually qualifies as a completely unrelated product
    despite having the same name. You yourself have mentioned at least two
    MS technologies that either no longer exist or are being phased out
    (QBasic and JET). Now, unlike you, I'm going to be fair and acknowledge
    that this is simply the nature of software. Microsoft, and its open
    source competitors, do well to occasionally abandon existing platforms
    as new technologies, architectures, and plain old hindsight dictate.

    > 6. Finally, MS is positioning Access to be a GUI front-end to any database,
    > and the hooks are already there. Look for a .NET version in the future.


    Access is terrific for creating *Windows* GUIs for databases (whatever
    database is chosen). Of course if you need (or simply want) cross-
    platform, very few Microsoft technologies are going to help you. .NET
    is being held up as such a solution but quite frankly, given Microsoft's
    bait-and-switch tactics of the past, I'll maintain a wait-and-see
    attitude until proven otherwise.

    > Sorry about the long rant, but so much mis-information has been passed along
    > in this thread and in past threads, mainly due to so much MS hatred,
    > deserved or not, that I felt I had to speak up.


    Well, certainly opinions of MS are just that. But all else aside,
    Microsoft made my job miserable for enough years with shifting API's,
    buggy software, inflexible/limited/incompatible tools that I feel quite
    justified in my contempt for them. And that's before considering their
    company from any ethical standpoint.

    > I get the impression that
    > most of the info comes from people parroting other people, and not really
    > knowing about the products that they are dis'ing.


    And I get the impression that people who defend Microsoft simply haven't
    tried anything better. I suppose we could continue to view each other's
    positions through Monet-tinted glasses but I doubt that really gets us
    anywhere. Try foaming at the mouth just a little less and instead focus
    on forwarding self-consistent arguments and perhaps you'll be a bit more
    convincing.

    Regards,
    Cliff

    --
    Cliff Wells <>
     
    Cliff Wells, Oct 11, 2004
    #16
  17. Aaron Bingham

    R Baumann Guest

    "Ville Vainio" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >>>>> "Baumann" == R Baumann <> writes:

    >
    > Baumann> <GASP!> M$ sells stuff for money! Why not? I like to
    > Baumann> eat, you like to eat. Don't like Microsoft?, sounds like
    > Baumann> a personal problem to me. I don't
    >
    > I know I'm treading highly flammable waters here, but dislike of a
    > company is not necessarily a purely personal problem (making the
    > assumption that ethics means something for the purpose of this
    > discussion). Making money is not a problem, it's *how* they make the
    > money (or more correctly, prevent others from making money) that irks
    > some people, including me.
    >
    > Baumann> like everything they do either, but to pay my salary, the
    > Baumann> company I work for has to make money, not live on
    > Baumann> indignant or righteous attitudes. I use whatever works
    > Baumann> best for the particular customer I have to work with. If
    >
    > Yes, we all need to make some concessions to make a living. If you are
    > paid to sell cigarettes and the alternative is going without a job,
    > you sell cigarettes. Where people draw the line is determined by their
    > individual (irrational) hangups like principles and ethics. Still, I
    > generally try not to ridicule people that have higher moral standards
    > than me.
    >
    > Of course an individal developer has very little power to decide these
    > things in the first place, so no drawing a line is necessary.
    >
    > --
    > Ville Vainio http://tinyurl.com/2prnb


    I don't disagree with a thing you've written in response to my little
    diatribe. No, I probably should have just stopped while I was ahead, and
    not included the paragraphs about MS, but it seems to me that not everyone
    in this, or other newsgroups has the same outlook as you do, and it was
    those people I was responding to. Some of those people would gripe if MS
    gave all their developer tools away for free. Some just gripe because
    they've heard others gripe. Ya just can't please everyone. :)

    If I've struck a sour note, I apologize to all. I absolutely grant and
    agree with you that a lot of the business decisions and marketing ploys that
    MS have practiced, and probably still practice, are not ethical, tend to
    raise hackles, and don't give people a warm fuzzy feeling, and develop a
    hatred for the company.

    Am I a MS supporter? Only to the extent that what I select to do a job must
    be the best product for that job. If it's MS, then it's MS. If it's
    Python, it's Python, and so on, and so on.

    RB
     
    R Baumann, Oct 11, 2004
    #17
  18. On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:05:50 -0700, Cliff Wells
    <> declaimed the following in
    comp.lang.python:

    > Microsoft products (SQL Server was released around 1989 on OS/2, 1992 on
    > Windows), so I fail to see your point here. Also, holding Microsoft up
    > as an example of a company that supports its own products for extended
    > periods of time is probably ill-advised. The original version of SQL
    > Server doesn't exist in any incarnation, nor does Microsoft support the


    Uhmm... Didn't I read somewhere that the original SQL-Server
    code base was a licensed version of Sybase?

    --
    > ============================================================== <
    > | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG <
    > | Bestiaria Support Staff <
    > ============================================================== <
    > Home Page: <http://www.dm.net/~wulfraed/> <
    > Overflow Page: <http://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/> <
     
    Dennis Lee Bieber, Oct 12, 2004
    #18
  19. Cliff Wells <> wrote:
    ...
    > But the question remains: why use a "watered down" version of a
    > database, or pay for an "industrial-strength" version of it when there
    > are free alternatives that actually surpass both versions?


    To play devil's advocate: there could (in theory) be sound reasons, such
    as different projected costs for support, migration, and the like. I do
    not think this kind of thing is ever a good reason to choose inferior
    technology, such as the Jet engine -- I believe people who have been
    doing new development based on Jet, ever since MS made it quite clear
    they didn't like it any more (4-5 years ago at least), have been myopic.
    But if a technology is sound (and MSDE/SQL Server appears to be), the
    trade-offs may be different.


    > > like everything they do either, but to pay my salary, the company I work for
    > > has to make money, not live on indignant or righteous attitudes. I use
    > > whatever works best for the particular customer I have to work with.

    >
    > Reasonable attitude. Despite being a Linux afficianado, I still
    > recommend Windows for most user's desktops, simply because there isn't


    Mac OS X is actually quite superior, though I found out less than a year
    ago, and "by accident" -- just because I bought an iBook 12", as the
    truly-portable laptop with the best price/performance ratio, intending
    to install Linux on it, then discovered that Darwin/OSX is better.

    These days, for most users' desktops, I recommend a Mac (there are of
    course some exceptions, e.g. if they absolutely need a specific
    application that just doesn't run there) -- though Linux on the desktop
    is generally quite usable these days (_laptops_ are another story... Mac
    is really the only way to go;-).

    > enough payoff to justify the learning curve for most people were they to
    > switch. Linux has major advantages over Windows in many areas, but the
    > desktop currently isn't one of them.


    It's getting there (though laptops are farther behind).


    > > If MS
    > > has a product that does what I need it to, I'll use it. If Python is a
    > > better way to do things, I'll use it, if QBasic, if Delphi, if...

    >
    > You'll use QBasic? And where will you get it from? I point this out
    > simply to highlight your apparent blindness to Microsoft's abandonment
    > of actively used tools (which you cite later as a reason to prefer MS
    > over open source projects).


    Yes, this IS a crucial issue. If an open-source project is "abandoned",
    your own projects based on it are _not_ dead or forced to migrate: you
    have the option of continuing to use the existing project, taking it up
    to develop it further, or at an intermediate level doing some minimal
    maintenance on it, etc. If a piece of commercial software is
    *abandoned*, OTOH, your own projects based on it are in deep trouble;
    you _are_ forced to migrate, or try to -- beause you cannot buy the
    software and new licenses for it any more.




    > despite having the same name. You yourself have mentioned at least two
    > MS technologies that either no longer exist or are being phased out
    > (QBasic and JET). Now, unlike you, I'm going to be fair and acknowledge
    > that this is simply the nature of software. Microsoft, and its open
    > source competitors, do well to occasionally abandon existing platforms
    > as new technologies, architectures, and plain old hindsight dictate.


    Yes, but if you've done value-added development on top of old plaftorms,
    you're in much better shape, with many more options, when those
    platforms are open, and generally very badly placed when those platforms
    are commercial.

    > > Sorry about the long rant, but so much mis-information has been passed along
    > > in this thread and in past threads, mainly due to so much MS hatred,
    > > deserved or not, that I felt I had to speak up.

    >
    > Well, certainly opinions of MS are just that. But all else aside,
    > Microsoft made my job miserable for enough years with shifting API's,
    > buggy software, inflexible/limited/incompatible tools that I feel quite
    > justified in my contempt for them. And that's before considering their
    > company from any ethical standpoint.


    Fair enough. I've delved into MS stuff for enough years to agree with
    you on these points. Once in a while something worthwhile does come out
    of Redmond, but it appears to be the exception rather than the rule.


    Alex
     
    Alex Martelli, Oct 12, 2004
    #19
  20. In article <>,
    Dennis Lee Bieber <> wrote:
    >On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:05:50 -0700, Cliff Wells
    ><> declaimed the following in
    >comp.lang.python:
    >
    >> Microsoft products (SQL Server was released around 1989 on OS/2, 1992 on
    >> Windows), so I fail to see your point here. Also, holding Microsoft up
    >> as an example of a company that supports its own products for extended
    >> periods of time is probably ill-advised. The original version of SQL
    >> Server doesn't exist in any incarnation, nor does Microsoft support the

    >
    > Uhmm... Didn't I read somewhere that the original SQL-Server
    >code base was a licensed version of Sybase?

    .
    .
    .
    It's hard, of course, for outsiders to know what you read. It might have
    been <URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SQL_Server#History >,
    though; in any case, yes, Microsoft bought its RDBMS technology from Sybase.
     
    Cameron Laird, Oct 12, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. gpeacock

    ASP database connectivity KB253604

    gpeacock, Nov 5, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    350
    Michael Evanchik
    Nov 10, 2003
  2. Steven Caliendo

    MySQL database connectivity

    Steven Caliendo, Dec 17, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    447
    dryer
    Dec 18, 2003
  3. Niks

    Database Connectivity using DSN

    Niks, Dec 22, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    10,883
    Kevin Spencer
    Jan 12, 2004
  4. Arun K

    Database Connectivity using DSN

    Arun K, Dec 22, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    406
    Natty Gur
    Dec 23, 2003
  5. C Newby

    Database Connectivity Problem ...

    C Newby, Apr 16, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    319
    C Newby
    Apr 16, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page