Web Design.

[Bigger Andy]

I want to expand my skills and have just booked on to a course on Microsoft FrontPage.

What I would like to know is :-


What other web design tools are available ?

What are the pros and cons of each of them ?

Which of them is most likely to help me get a job in that field ?


Any help and advice would be appreciated. :flower:

[azande]

The industry standard software is Macromedia (www.macromedia.com) suite, especially Dreamweaver and Flash. I believe good Photoshop (www.adobe.com) skills are essential as is knowledge of raw HTML (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML),XHTML (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XHTML) and Cascadin Style Sheets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets), also important is knowledge of databases (MySQL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MySQL) is the most common) and PHP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PHP) and Perl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl) programming/scripting languages.

I believe you have enough here for a while!

[Swinging bee]

I want to expand my skills and have just booked on to a course on Microsoft FrontPage.

What I would like to know is :-


What other web design tools are available ?

What are the pros and cons of each of them ?

Which of them is most likely to help me get a job in that field ?


Any help and advice would be appreciated. :flower:





Hi Andy, Big question. Linda uses Front Page for the jivehive (www.jivehive.co.uk) website and a different system for the one where she works...We have 3 offsprings in IT. I know that middle son (an IT manager) uses FLASH and another system called DREAM WEAVER.
talk to us at our next dance on saturday can maybe give you some tips..JF

[Feelingpink]

I want to expand my skills and have just booked on to a course on Microsoft FrontPage.

What I would like to know is :-


What other web design tools are available ?

What are the pros and cons of each of them ?

Which of them is most likely to help me get a job in that field ?


Any help and advice would be appreciated. :flower:


What I understand is that the industry standard is Dreamweaver and FrontPage is seen more as consumer software (since its look and feel is like MS Office). Apparently the code that FrontPage produces is far more 'messy' than Dreamweaver. The only things against Dreamweaver are its cost and learning a new package.

And if you're thinking of buying any books on XML etc, the O'Reilly series are totally wonderful (they are the ones with cute line drawings of animals on the cover).

There are also sure to be other opinions.

[ducasi]

What other web design tools are available ? The two biggies are Macromedia's Dreamweaver, and Adobe's GoLive. I think that Dreamweaver is the more popular of the two, though that doesn't necessarily make it the better.

As Adobe has just agreed to buy Macromedia the future of both of these packages is open to question.

I've used Dreamweaver a fair bit, mainly to help me organise my web sites rather than doing actual page layout. It has lots of really useful features, but I've found it a bit buggy and prone to crashes. That's on a Mac – Windows users may have had different experiences.

That said, what's most important in web design is a strong knowledge of HTML, CSS, Javascript, etc, a good eye for design and page layout, and a sympathetic understanding of the poor folks who have to find their way around your web site. If you have these sorted it doesn't really matter what program you use to put them into practice.

Oh yeah, and like azande said, if you're going to be building more complex web sites, some knowledge of PHP, Perl and SQL will be invaluable.

Hope this helps! :nice:

[azande]

You can find lots of tutorials on the web as well. Have a look at: http://www.hotscripts.com and the forum http://www.programmingtalk.com.

A list apart (http://alistapart.com) is an online magazine about web design and web standards, the World Wide Web Consortium (http://www.w3.org) and the O'Reilly (www.oreilly.com) website.

[David Bailey]

That said, what's most important in web design is a strong knowledge of HTML, CSS, Javascript, etc, a good eye for design and page layout, and a sympathetic understanding of the poor folks who have to find their way around your web site.
I agree with pretty much all the comments so far (that's a first!).

The most important (and basic) thing you probably need to know is HTML - the "code" (markup language) used to create the sites. To create HTML, you don't need to use FrontPage, Dreamweaver, Arachnophilia, or other editing tools - you can create perfectly good HTML with Windows Notepad. I update and maintain our corporate web site with a text editor, no problem.

And if you know the basics, you'll then find it easier to get the most out of the tools, which are basically just labour-saving ways of doing it manually.

The problem with only learning the applications (e.g. FrontPage) is that you are, to a lesser or greater extent, then "tied in" to using that application, and so you're stuffed if it goes out of fashion. Whereas if you learn the basics first, you can swap applications as required to get the best effect.

Another problem with things like FrontPage, as stated, is that is munges up the HTML code something chronic (technical description :) ). So you can't then easily modify the page with another application, or by hand, because the code generated is, well, not perfectlu readable...

Other possible tools you could use are:
- TextPad: very cheap text editor with HTML-compliant highlighting (I use it)
- Mozilla editor: free, and doesn't munge code up too much

As for usability, I'd very much :yeah: - it's very important. Try www.useit.com for a pretty authoritative list of articles on the subject.


Hope that helps.

[Yliander]

Other possible tools you could use are:
- TextPad: very cheap text editor with HTML-compliant highlighting (I use it)
- Mozilla editor: free, and doesn't munge code up too much

I have nifty little program called 1st page that I use when writing html code - colours code making it easier to read - a nice preview tab so can wriite & see what it looks like all in one program.

Also has some auto functions i don't use them much - but they seem to write pretty clean code

[El Salsero Gringo]

Two comments:

Firstly, FrontPage is nasty, nasty, nasty. Go nowhere near it. Cancel your course, and save your money.

Secondly, learn to use Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) right from the word go. Used properly, they will enable you to separate the 'look' of your website(s) from the content. That makes editing either of those elements *so much simpler*.

[Northants Girly]

FrontPage is nasty, nasty, nasty. Go nowhere near it. Cancel your course, and save your money. :yeah:

[azande]

Two comments:

Firstly, FrontPage is nasty, nasty, nasty. Go nowhere near it. Cancel your course, and save your money.

Secondly, learn to use Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) right from the word go. Used properly, they will enable you to separate the 'look' of your website(s) from the content. That makes editing either of those elements *so much simpler*.

:yeah:

Before spending money on books have a look at http://www.tizag.com and go through the tutorials for HTML and CSS to get an idea of how things work.

[Northants Girly]

This link to W3 Schools (http://www.w3schools.com/default.asp) is useful too

[El Salsero Gringo]

Perhaps I'm just prejudiced and cruel, but if anyone tried to sell themselves to me as a Web Designer and mentioned their FrontPage skills on their CV, I'd show them the door. Then have a good loud laugh at them, just before they were out of earshot.

OK, I think I'm labouring the point now.

[azande]

And FrontPage is a Micros**t product!!

[El Salsero Gringo]

And FrontPage is a Micros**t product!!I don't have an ideological objection to it because it's by MS, it just that it's a seriously sh*t program that produces seriously sh*t HTML. No serious designer would go anwhere near it as far as I know, just like no serious composer writes for the Rolf Harris Stylophone.

[Franck]

I don't have an ideological objection to it because it's by MS, it just that it's a seriously sh*t program that produces seriously sh*t HTML. No serious designer would go anwhere near it as far as I know, just like no serious composer writes for the Rolf Harris Stylophone.I don't have any ideological objections to any MS software it's just that: Windows (all versions), Frontpage, Access, Explorer, Outlook Express, Word are all sh*t programs that produce seriously sh*t results, bad habits and poor security. :wink:

[azande]

I don't have any ideological objections to any MS software it's just that: Windows (all versions), Frontpage, Access, Explorer, Outlook Express, Word are all sh*t programs that produce seriously sh*t results, bad habits and poor security. :wink:

DEFINITELY :yeah:

[Dreadful Scathe]

Nothing much for me to add, I agree with pretty much everything (especially the frontpage comments). You would be better going on some sort of "introduction to the web course" once you understand how everything hangs together the rest is easy (or easier). Then read useit and w3c as others have suggested and hack others peoples code- its the best way to learn. Just "View the source" for the page you're looking at, copy it to a folder, edit it in notepad, save it and drag and drop it onto a browser window to see the changes.

The biggest thing about being a web designer though is the ability to design. Sounds obvious, but there are coders and there are designers - if you can be both you're in with a good chance. :)

[Bigger Andy]

I don't have any ideological objections to any MS software it's just that: Windows (all versions), Frontpage, Access, Explorer, Outlook Express, Word are all sh*t programs that produce seriously sh*t results, bad habits and poor security. :wink:

So, apart from those small points, MS software is quite good then ? :whistle:



Seriously though, Thanks everyone :flower: for your help and especially for the information on useful websites and tutorials.

To Swinging bee (JF) : I will talk to you at the next dance on saturday 30th (or perhaps earlier in the day).

Thanks again !

[David Bailey]

I don't have any ideological objections to any MS software it's just that: Windows (all versions), Frontpage, Access, Explorer, Outlook Express, Word are all sh*t programs that produce seriously sh*t results, bad habits and poor security. :wink:
Possibly a little extreme - I'd also note that the "I don't have any ideological objections to any MS software" combined with "all their software is sh*t" maybe just a leeetle bit contradictory... OK, you left out Powerpoint (Colin Powell uses it!) and Excel, fair enough.

I'd also defend Word as a useful tool under certain circumstances; mainly if you want to quickly write a small-to-medium sized document (<50 pp), with basic formatting. I also don't believe all versions of Windows are total crap; again, depends what your requirements are. Some sysadmin bias creeping in here methinks... :whistle:

Yes, Frontpage is not a skill I'd advertise were I a Web Designer, good point, ESG.

[DavidB]

I don't have any ideological objections to any MS software it's just that: Windows (all versions), Frontpage, Access, Explorer, Outlook Express, Word are all sh*t programs that produce seriously sh*t results, bad habits and poor security. :wink:I would rate Access as one of the best database programs ever, and a real victim of its own success.
It was light years ahead of anything else when it was launched (anyone remember Paradox?) Its query designer is still rated as a classic. Crosstab queries are an excellent analysis tool, and Access makes them easy (as opposed to Sybase or Oracle). Its ability to connect to just about anything is why I still have it installed, despite using database tools that cost thousands.

It has only ever had one major problem - scalability. Like any local file-based database it was never designed to cope with large numbers of users, but unfortunately most of the time it could.

Its other 'problem' is its ease of use. Every company I've worked in has had Access databases that have become mission-critical. They evolved independently of the IT department because there wasn't the budget, and they got the job done. And then the 'proper' replacement systems cost 10 times as much, and are usually missing some features.

Access is one of the 3 best programs Microsoft have done. (Excel and .NET are the others.)

I have no doubt that if it was written by Apple then several people here would think it the best thing since sliced bread. But there is as much chance of Mac fanatics complementing Microsoft as there is of me buying a Mac.

So Franck/Azande et al - can you explain why Access is so bad without mentionning Microsoft or scalability?

And in answer to the original question, I would only ever use Frontpage for very simple websites, or maybe prototyping. Everywhere I know uses Dreamweaver or notepad.

[Franck]

So Franck/Azande et al - can you explain why Access is so bad without mentionning Microsoft or scalability?.Well for one, it only works, on Windows system. Most (real) database software work on windows / mac os / linux etc...

The error messages that it throws are also archaic Windows nonsense, yes they make sense to your Windows sysadmin, but to a user, being warned of 'key violations' and exception errors makes no sense to the user and is very frustrating.

It's also quite slow, now admittedly I didn't buy very powerful pcs to run it but the laptops are brand new Dell and should be able to handle a database.

It's possible Access started quite well (a lot of Microsoft software did, up until they bought it and added 'features'), but Access today doesn't look all that impressive.

[Gadget]

Re: html coding
I use [url=http://www.chami.com/html-kit/]HTML Kit[/quote] - a free downloadable tool with masses of plugins to help program web pages instead of just write them. Does the whole colour coding thing, has auto complete of tags, will check your code and strip all the garbage that Microsoft programs put in when they generate HTML, preview panes, ... highly recommended.

And I would spend more time learning PHP (& SQL) and HTML than programs that do it for you - once you know what they are doing, you can get so much more out of them.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Well for one, it only works, on Windows system. Most (real) database software work on windows / mac os / linux etc...


I'd agree with DavidB that for a simple database Access does it all and is decent enough that many big companies use it for critical data. If anyone can suggest a better database than Access that is designed for the small office Id like to hear it! Open Office does have a simple database with it too but Ive not used it.

[DavidB]

Well for one, it only works, on Windows system. Most (real) database software work on windows / mac os / linux etc...Good point. You would never get Apple writing software that just works on a Mac...


The error messages that it throws are also archaic Windows nonsense, yes they make sense to your Windows sysadmin, but to a user, being warned of 'key violations' and exception errors makes no sense to the user and is very frustrating.

It's also quite slow, now admittedly I didn't buy very powerful pcs to run it but the laptops are brand new Dell and should be able to handle a database.Sounds like it is just a badly written database application. Error messages are there for the user, and the user of Access is a database programmer. It is up to him to present those error messages in a suitable way for the users of his database application.

At least it wasn't the error I got this week (via Sybase and Unix) complaining about the "Maximum Parallel Degree being less than the number of partitions when creating a clustered index". Try translating that for an average user.

That is the problem when you make things too easy - anyone thinks they can do it. It is not just in computing. It is happening in Ballroom Dancing of all things. There is this new craze called Ceroc. They have made it really simple, and people think they can do a couple of classes and then dance! Don't they know that it takes years of classes, private lessons, medal tests etc... They don't even do footwork for heavens sake!

[ducasi]

If anyone can suggest a better database than Access that is designed for the small office Id like to hear it! That's easy - FileMaker Pro.

I'm sure for the majority of uses of Access, Filemaker would do just as well but would take much less time to set up.


You would never get Apple writing software that just works on a Mac... Franck's point about Access only running on Windows is actually a fair one.

You have to ask why is the complete Office package available for Macs, with the exception of Access? My understanding is that Access's database engine is so closely tied to the Intel architecture (much of it written in x86 assembly) that they just can't port it to other machines and get decent performance.

If Microsoft had released a good port of Access for the Mac back when they started bundling up their applications into "Office" they could have killed off Filemaker, which if I recall correctly was only available for the Mac at that time.

There must have been a good reason for them not to – and I expect it was because all the Filemaker users would have just laughed at them. :rofl:

But, back on topic... one aspect of good web design not mentioned so-far is to make sure your web pages work on all the major browsers on all the major platforms. We don't all run Internet Explorer on Windows. :mad:

[Funky Si]

Andy,

I use Dreamweaver and Fireworks for the new www.cerockent.net (http://www.cerockent.net) site and also for Bill's site www.ceroctv.co.uk (http://www.ceroctv.co.uk) . (Also check out (www.srgentertainment.com (http://www.srgentertainment.com)) Gimme a shout on Wednesday and I'll recommend some really good starter books that'll show the lot- they even come with a trial of Macromedia Studio MX. :nice:

Funky Si

[philsmove]

I have a small company that is totally reliant on MS access
It has served me very well for the past 10 years+ We have never tried anything else
Ok it wont make tea but apart from that it runs a small office of 7 PCs quickly and efficiently

[El Salsero Gringo]

Franck's point about Access only running on Windows is actually a fair one.No it's not fair, it's silly. (OK, can we agree on fairly silly?)
You have to ask why is the complete Office package available for Macs, with the exception of Access? My understanding is that Access's database engine is so closely tied to the Intel architecture (much of it written in x86 assembly) that they just can't port it to other machines and get decent performance.Apart from Professors of Computer Science who get off on that kind of thing, to whom does this matter? If you want a database that runs only on PC's then Access is a candidate. If not then... it isn't. That it runs only on one architecture doesn't make it any less capable as a database. In fact, for the rest of us, it's an advantage to have the code optimised for the platform on which it runs.
If Microsoft had released a good port of Access for the Mac back when they started bundling up their applications into "Office" they could have killed off Filemaker, which if I recall correctly was only available for the Mac at that time.

There must have been a good reason for them not to – and I expect it was because all the Filemaker users would have just laughed at them. :rofl:And that's the first time I've ever heard MS slagged off for *not* squashing a competitor's product.

[David Bailey]

But, back on topic... one aspect of good web design not mentioned so-far is to make sure your web pages work on all the major browsers on all the major platforms. We don't all run Internet Explorer on Windows. :mad:
Excellent point - especially now the Mozilla spinoffs have started to gain ground. Except in a few areas, I'm pretty technophobic, but even I've now moved from Outlook to Thunderbird, and from IE to Mozilla.

So it's definitely a good idea to test on (at least) Mozilla and IE.

[ducasi]

No it's not fair, it's silly. (OK, can we agree on fairly silly?) How about fairly fair? :D

Apart from Professors of Computer Science who get off on that kind of thing, to whom does this matter? If you want a database that runs only on PC's then Access is a candidate. Does anyone ever say to themselves "I want a database that only runs on ..."? I wouldn't have thought so. Most people who choose to use Access do so out of ignorance of the wide range of (sometimes better) alternatives available. And once you start with Access you're pretty much locked in.

If not then... it isn't. That it runs only on one architecture doesn't make it any less capable as a database. In fact, for the rest of us, it's an advantage to have the code optimised for the platform on which it runs. Until you want to run it on your new 64-bit machine. Portability is always an advantage – one that Microsoft will always want to rob you of.

And that's the first time I've ever heard MS slagged off for *not* squashing a competitor's product. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. :wink:

[philsmove]

But, back on topic... one aspect of good web design not mentioned so-far is to make sure your web pages work on all the major browsers on all the major platforms. We don't all run Internet Explorer on Windows. :mad:


Well nearly back on topic
Anyhow how can I,
Check all the non-explorer browsers can read my web site :confused:

[Clive Long]

Well nearly back on topic
Anyhow how can I,
Check all the non-explorer browsers can read my web site :confused:
Well of course you can't check all.

From my just above user experience and knowledge (I'm no Web-head)

If you go to the Netscape site (as I have just done) they have an extensive archive of different versions.

As an example of impact of new features on old software look at this site through Netscape 4.8 - it appears as a mixture of Picasso and Warhol - quite attractive but unusable.

There is a practical (and probably technical) limit to the versions and programs you can test against so all the current versions plus the previous two versions seems reasonable - and put out a banner on your home page saying "Tested against program X version Y" helps. Or just test against one version and stuff 'em.

CRL

[ducasi]

Well nearly back on topic
Anyhow how can I,
Check all the non-explorer browsers can read my web site :confused: First download Mozilla, Firefox and Opera and try it out on them. Once you've got them sorted, find a friend with a Mac (or buy a Mac mini and a 2-port KVM switch) and try it with Safari, Mac IE and maybe also Mozilla, Opera, etc...

If you want to be complete, download a copy of Knoppix (http://www.knoppix.org/) and boot your PC from it to get the Linux experience and test your site with Konqueror (which is what Safari on the Mac is based on) and Mozilla, etc.. on a third platform.

But probably the easiest way is to stick with standard HTML and simple layout. Things are much less likely to break that way.

Another tip to anyone still reading – try not to make assumptions about the width of the window. Does anyone else think it's really naff that the box you type these posts into sits inside a box that is falling off the side of the window?

[frodo]

First download Mozilla, Firefox and Opera and try it out on them. Once you've got them sorted, find a friend with a Mac (or buy a Mac mini and a 2-port KVM switch) and try it with Safari, Mac IE and maybe also Mozilla, Opera, etc...

If you want to be complete, download a copy of Knoppix (http://www.knoppix.org/) and boot your PC from it to get the Linux experience and test your site with Konqueror (which is what Safari on the Mac is based on) and Mozilla, etc.. on a third platform.

But probably the easiest way is to stick with standard HTML and simple layout. Things are much less likely to break that way.

Another tip to anyone still reading – try not to make assumptions about the width of the window. Does anyone else think it's really naff that the box you type these posts into sits inside a box that is falling off the side of the window? :yeah:

Almost point for point what I would recommend, though I probably wouldn't focus on Mozilla - FireFox matters more.

It might be safer to try out Knoppix first in Microsoft Virtual PC ( no reboot or CD writing needed, and it can't damage much if it goes wrong )

A pretty unrestricted 45 day trial of Microsoft Virtual PC may be found at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=360cafd6-5098-4c64-9ca7-a30f225859f6&DisplayLang=en


Mobile browsers are a more difficult subject, and compatibility with them is where the standard HTML and simple layout matters much more.

[bigdjiver]

Access was bought in by Microsoft as a quick and dirty temporary measure until the got their flagship database application, SQLServer, up to standard. Unfortunately for them the MS Access team has manged, so far, to keep upgrading it and sell enough to keep it alive. Microsoft does not want to support two database technologies, and the quest to lose Access continues. It probably was not ported to the Mac as for that reason.

[ducasi]

Almost point for point what I would recommend, though I probably wouldn't focus on Mozilla - FireFox matters more. Sure, where I say "Mozilla", I really mean the family of web browsers based on mozilla.org's Gecko HTML renderer. :nice: And at the moment the Mozilla browser and Firefox are pretty much identical when it comes to rendering.

It might be safer to try out Knoppix first in Microsoft Virtual PC ( no reboot or CD writing needed, and it can't damage much if it goes wrong )

A pretty unrestricted 45 day trial of Microsoft Virtual PC may be found at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=360cafd6-5098-4c64-9ca7-a30f225859f6&DisplayLang=en Can Virtual PC boot from a CD image? Does the Microsoft licence even allow VPC to boot a non-Microsoft OS? :what: :wink:

Where I work we use Knoppix to install our Windows 'clone' images, and for general diagnosis. We've never seen it do any damage to any of our systems. (I suppose there can always be a first time!)

Mobile browsers are a more difficult subject, and compatibility with them is where the standard HTML and simple layout matters much more. :yeah: Tried doing some browsing recently with a Pocket PC device – not a pleasant experience. :sick:

[frodo]

...
Can Virtual PC boot from a CD image? Does the Microsoft licence even allow VPC to boot a non-Microsoft OS? :what: :wink:

Absolutely (the boot) ( though there is a bug booting from DVD images bigger than around 2.2Gb ). Microsoft discourage the use of non-Microsoft OS here by making it slower and less functional, but not really a problem for just testing browsers.


...
Where I work we use Knoppix to install our Windows 'clone' images, and for general diagnosis. We've never seen it do any damage to any of our systems. (I suppose there can always be a first time!)

It is highly unlikely to do any damage, but it could do easily in theory with all that software from many sources on the CD.

Obviously for cloning and general diagnostics you get a significant benefit from a very small risk. On an important computer if simply testing browsers there may be no need to take even that small risk.





I don't have any ideological objections to any MS software it's just that: Windows (all versions), Frontpage, Access, Explorer, Outlook Express, Word are all sh*t programs that produce seriously sh*t results, bad habits and poor security.
I would rate Access as one of the best database programs ever when it was launched (anyone remember Paradox?) ...
:yeah:
Access is definitely the odd one out. To be fair the absolute latest versions and service packs of Windows and Word are not quite as sh*t as previously - the scandal is perhaps that with Microsoft's resources it has taken so long even to get this far.

Still preferred Object PAL to VBA though. :nice:



It has only ever had one major problem - scalability. Like any local file-based database it was never designed to cope with large numbers of users, but unfortunately most of the time it could.

The difficult thing that Access does is that it works over network file shares, and with a single easy to manage data file at that. It is much easier to do a scalable reliable local-file based database with multiple files and if it doesn't need to work over a file share

[Dreadful Scathe]

I'm sure for the majority of uses of Access, Filemaker would do just as well but would take much less time to set up.

Certainly a copy of people commenting on this review (http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:LFiocEgRYxwJ:reviews.cnet.com/FileMaker_Pro_7_0/4514-3521_7-30790919.html+filemaker+pro+better+than+access&hl=en) agree FileMaker is better. I cant comment, having never used it, but Access has direct interaction with Windows, theres a create database button when you select your ODBC drivers - the application that needs a database uses the new one.



But, back on topic... one aspect of good web design not mentioned so-far is to make sure your web pages work on all the major browsers on all the major platforms. We don't all run Internet Explorer on Windows. :mad:

You can use www.anybrowser.com to do all your testing for you.


And once you start with Access you're pretty much locked in.

I dont see how! Its just data, and theres not likely to be a huge amount of it in an Access database - just migrate from one database to another.


Microsoft does not want to support two database technologies

You cant compare Access and SQL Server and I would doubt they are treated the same way at Microsoft. One is a part of office software and one is a huge enterprise sized database (max size is aparantly 1,048,516 TB). Its like comparing notepad to Word 2003 - Im sure Microsoft are quite happy making money with whatever will sell. They are especially unlikely to lose an office level database when Open Office the competing open source office suite has one. It is a completely different market.

[Clive Long]

<< snippity >>
You can use www.anybrowser.com to do all your testing for you.
<< snippity >>

:waycool:

[ducasi]

And once you start with Access you're pretty much locked in.I dont see how! Its just data, and theres not likely to be a huge amount of it in an Access database - just migrate from one database to another. In the context of a proper Access "application", you'll have set up forms and written VB scripts and such.

While you can easily move the data, it's much harder to move the rest. But if you stick to using cross-platform solutions, moving it is easier.

I'd recommend a web-based solution myself, probably using PHP and MySQL. (Which again, brings us back on topic. :nice: :whistle: )

[alex]

Access was bought in by Microsoft as a quick and dirty temporary measure until the got their flagship database application, SQLServer, up to standard. Unfortunately for them the MS Access team has manged, so far, to keep upgrading it and sell enough to keep it alive. Microsoft does not want to support two database technologies, and the quest to lose Access continues. It probably was not ported to the Mac as for that reason.I like a good work of fiction.

Access was completely developed in-house by Microsoft. Originally in the late '80s they had the Omega project, which split into two: Thunder (which became Visual Basic) and Cirrus (which became Access). No part of it was ever "bought in". Microsoft did subsequently buy FoxPro, and initially developed SQL Server in partnership with Sybase, but Access is all their own work.

It was designed to compete with dBase/FoxPro and Paradox. It was not designed to compete with Client Server RDMS systems like Sybase, Oracle or SQL Server. They have always been completely different markets.

Microsoft have 3 database technologies, not two. They still have FoxPro, and still actively sell and support it. (I think they are still developing it as well, but can't find confirmation of this.)

Access is going to be in the next release of Office in 2006. The big debate seems to be whether it will use .NET as its scripting engine or stick with VBA.




It's also quite slowSounds like it is just a badly written database application.Access has never been the fastest database. Foxpro could always beat it.