3 ms·

I've been wondering for 25 years if there has ever been a legitimate use case for this abomination.

• defrost 3y ago
  Trojan gift horse for undermining the competition .. once they're hip deep and headed deeper into Access dependancy you're free to play the field without concern of them catching up.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• Optimal_Persona 3y ago
  In 20 years I've encountered precisely one Access Database that was very well designed, adequately documented, and implemented correctly - meaning people used a single instance on a specific machine, or Remote Desktop Protocol'd into same. Connecting to an Access database over a network from individual client apps is a recipe for pain as the database file gets locked, so then people start saving "copy of copy of copy USE THIS ONE" versions and you get divergent database backends with no clean way to merge. IME this always happens for business critical Access systems with no backup and documentation at the least convenient time, and suddenly it's IT's problem/fault. Yes you can connect to a SQL Server backend, but then it's IT's problem/fault/responsibility to maintain, and it takes Access out of the "simple enough for business users" domain. That said, as a rapid app development desktop tool Access can work very well if you know its limitations. It's somewhat surprising MS never made a 365 web-first equivalent, but that's probably because they'd rather charge for Dynamics 365 licenses and Azure SQL hosting.