Why choose SQL Express over Access?

[ljh]

Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies?

[james.curran@gmail.com]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application
to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, since
your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for
your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question.

So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them.
1) It's free.
2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server.

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Short incomplete list of reasons -

- SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
users.
- It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
- It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
backups *.*)
- It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR, better
T-SQL*.*
- It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
- You won't have to compact it as often
- Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
- Other reasons.

The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And frankly
SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway.

- Sahil Malik

http://www.winsmarts.com

"ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
news:kP1fg.6618 4$MM6.44395@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=blue]
> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
> dependencies?
>
>
>[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb files
with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that you
install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound.

In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it with
my app, is there a silent install available?

<james.curran@g mail.com> wrote in message
news:1149020977 .932902.220830@ u72g2000cwu.goo glegroups.com.. .[color=blue]
> Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application
> to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, since
> your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for
> your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question.
>
> So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them.
> 1) It's free.
> 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server.
>[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.

The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
something called "Remoteware " (whatever the hell that is) -
http://www.sybase.com/products/mobil...ns/sqlanywhere .

I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the
whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they have
abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.

They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be about
it.

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrum yblog@nospam.co m> wrote in message
news:uARMMlChGH A.1508@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Short incomplete list of reasons -
>
> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
> users.
> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
> backups *.*)
> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
> better T-SQL*.*
> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
> - You won't have to compact it as often
> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
> - Other reasons.
>
> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
> name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
> anyway.
>
> - Sahil Malik
> http://www.winsmarts.com
>
>
> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
> news:kP1fg.6618 4$MM6.44395@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=green]
>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
>> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
>> dependencies?
>>
>>
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

[Frank Rizzo]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

ljh wrote:[color=blue]
> I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.
>
> The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
> something called "Remoteware " (whatever the hell that is) -
> http://www.sybase.com/products/mobil...ns/sqlanywhere .[/color]

Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll
never amount to anything. However, I used the product a couple of years
ago and it is solid. It has all the drivers and easy of use and
surprising performance and all that.
[color=blue]
> I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the[/color]
I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland. You got your
vendors confused.

[color=blue]
> whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they have
> abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.
>
> They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be about
> it.
>
> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrum yblog@nospam.co m> wrote in message
> news:uARMMlChGH A.1508@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>> Short incomplete list of reasons -
>>
>> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
>> users.
>> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
>> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
>> backups *.*)
>> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
>> better T-SQL*.*
>> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
>> - You won't have to compact it as often
>> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
>> - Other reasons.
>>
>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
>> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
>> name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
>> anyway.
>>
>> - Sahil Malik
>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
>> news:kP1fg.6618 4$MM6.44395@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=darkred]
>>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
>>> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
>>> dependencies?
>>>
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

[Frank Rizzo]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:[color=blue]
> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And frankly
> SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these name
> changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications anyway.[/color]

There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home
Edition, while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro). So if you are
targeting mom&pop shops or the home market, either do Access or stick to
MSDE.

Regards

[John B]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

ljh wrote:[color=blue]
> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
> work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies?
>
>
>[/color]
Sql Express is a lot more performant and scaleable than access.
If you get a db size over 1/2 GB or so in access you will probably run
into trouble with corruptions etc.
If you eventually need to upgrade to full Sql Server then its a straight
backup / restore operation of the database and you are up and running.
If you only need and will only ever need a very simple db mechanism then
access might be the way to go.

JB

[William Stacey [MVP]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released this
summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls.
http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/ar...whereInfo.aspx

--
William Stacey [MVP]

"ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
news:Dm2fg.6618 8$MM6.13884@big news3.bellsouth .net...
|I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb files
| with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that you
| install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound.
|
| In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it
with
| my app, is there a silent install available?
|
| <james.curran@g mail.com> wrote in message
| news:1149020977 .932902.220830@ u72g2000cwu.goo glegroups.com.. .
| > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application
| > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And, since
| > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for
| > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question.
| >
| > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them.
| > 1) It's free.
| > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server.
| >
|
|

[William Stacey [MVP]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

It is Sql Everywhere. Check out the faq in the linq I gave above. For the
most part, it is Sql Mobile with a license change that will run anywhere
(XP, etc).

--
William Stacey [MVP]

"ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
news:7t2fg.6618 9$MM6.15646@big news3.bellsouth .net...
|I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.
|
| The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
| something called "Remoteware " (whatever the hell that is) -
| http://www.sybase.com/products/mobil...ns/sqlanywhere .
|
| I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the
| whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they
have
| abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.
|
| They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be
about
| it.
|
| "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrum yblog@nospam.co m> wrote in message
| news:uARMMlChGH A.1508@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...
| > Short incomplete list of reasons -
| >
| > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
| > users.
| > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
| > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
| > backups *.*)
| > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
| > better T-SQL*.*
| > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
| > - You won't have to compact it as often
| > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
| > - Other reasons.
| >
| > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
| > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
| > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
| > anyway.
| >
| > - Sahil Malik
| > http://www.winsmarts.com
| >
| >
| > "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
| > news:kP1fg.6618 4$MM6.44395@big news3.bellsouth .net...
| >> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
application
| >> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
| >> dependencies?
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >
| >
|
|

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

I have a company that runs several (6 - 10) small stores that does the
rent-to-own thing. The software they have now is generic and the service
sucks. They want a personalized solution for thier rather unique product
line.

Thing is......they want all stores to share information (real-time of
course), they want information stored locally in case there is an internet
outgae, and they don't want to buy a SQL Server license for every store.

So.....I need to come up with a free way to have shared, locally replicated
data at each store.

Theoretically it is pretty simple.

Practically, its a pain in the ass.


"John B" <jbngspam@yahoo .com> wrote in message
news:447ccdf6_1 @news.iprimus.c om.au...[color=blue]
> ljh wrote:[color=green]
>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
>> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
>> dependencies?
>>
>>
>>[/color]
> Sql Express is a lot more performant and scaleable than access.
> If you get a db size over 1/2 GB or so in access you will probably run
> into trouble with corruptions etc.
> If you eventually need to upgrade to full Sql Server then its a straight
> backup / restore operation of the database and you are up and running.
> If you only need and will only ever need a very simple db mechanism then
> access might be the way to go.
>
> JB[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Awesome!

It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS
though.

That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
development so much easier!

It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at
succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server.

But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses
grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten the bottom line
at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a "grown up"
version of SQL Server.

If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king.

Thanks for the great link!



"William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Odp%23lzDh GHA.3376@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released
> this
> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls.
> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/ar...whereInfo.aspx
>
> --
> William Stacey [MVP]
>
> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
> news:Dm2fg.6618 8$MM6.13884@big news3.bellsouth .net...
> |I mean that you can use Access databases simply by including the .mdb
> files
> | with your application, whereas using SQL Server Express requires that
> you
> | install SQL Server Express and have it running in the backgound.
> |
> | In the event that I use SQL Server Express and need to redistribute it
> with
> | my app, is there a silent install available?
> |
> | <james.curran@g mail.com> wrote in message
> | news:1149020977 .932902.220830@ u72g2000cwu.goo glegroups.com.. .
> | > Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "requires an installed application
> | > to work". I just downloaded it, ran the setup & it worked. And,
> since
> | > your reluctance to do that is the *ONLY* requirement you specify for
> | > your database needs, it's really hard to answer your question.
> | >
> | > So, the advantages of SQLExpress over Access, as I see them.
> | > 1) It's free.
> | > 2) It's directly compatible with Sql Server.
> | >
> |
> |
>
>[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

You're right..... I got Sybase and Borland mixed up. Must've been that
whole JBuilder collaboration thing that threw me.

They are definitely not the same company.

"Frank Rizzo" <none@none.co m> wrote in message
news:%23rBSlsDh GHA.4284@TK2MSF TNGP05.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> ljh wrote:[color=green]
>> I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.
>>
>> The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
>> something called "Remoteware " (whatever the hell that is) -
>> http://www.sybase.com/products/mobil...ns/sqlanywhere .[/color]
>
> Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll
> never amount to anything. However, I used the product a couple of years
> ago and it is solid. It has all the drivers and easy of use and
> surprising performance and all that.
>[color=green]
>> I don't really trust Borland anyway. They jumped right in line with the[/color]
> I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland. You got your
> vendors confused.
>
>[color=green]
>> whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they
>> have abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.
>>
>> They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be
>> about it.
>>
>> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrum yblog@nospam.co m> wrote in message
>> news:uARMMlChGH A.1508@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...[color=darkred]
>>> Short incomplete list of reasons -
>>>
>>> - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
>>> users.
>>> - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
>>> - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
>>> backups *.*)
>>> - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
>>> better T-SQL*.*
>>> - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
>>> - You won't have to compact it as often
>>> - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
>>> - Other reasons.
>>>
>>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
>>> frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
>>> name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> - Sahil Malik
>>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>>>
>>>
>>> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
>>> news:kP1fg.6618 4$MM6.44395@big news3.bellsouth .net...
>>>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed
>>>> application to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which
>>>> has no dependencies?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>[/color]
>>[/color][/color]

[Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]]

RE: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

If you really are looking for a lightweight, fast, no - deployment database
then why not look into SQLite? There's an ADO.NET and an ADO.NET 2.0 provider
(thanks to Robert Simpson) and it screams compared to MS Access. Not even an
MDAC dependency.
Peter

--
Co-founder, Eggheadcafe.com developer portal:

http://www.eggheadcafe.com

UnBlog:

http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com

"ljh" wrote:
[color=blue]
> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
> work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies?
>
>
>
>[/color]

[Homer J Simpson]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?


"Frank Rizzo" <none@none.co m> wrote in message
news:%23j9fctDh GHA.4284@TK2MSF TNGP05.phx.gbl. ..
[color=blue]
> There is one more Access advantage: it'll run on Windows XP Home Edition,
> while SQL Express will not (requires XP Pro).[/color]

Huh? SQL Express works OK on XP Home.