Why choose SQL Express over Access?

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

I'm trying it out. But, I can't even get it to create an empty db so that
I can use the VS.Net 2005 tools to create the tables, columns, etc.

I type "sqlite3 test.db" at the C:\ prompt (where I have a copy of
sqlite3.exe. Then, I type ".exit" and look for the empyt db....but there is
nothing there.

Any suggestions?

"Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]" <pbromberg@yaho o.nospammin.com > wrote in message
news:EAA36952-A294-48B8-9AC0-698C8852E184@mi crosoft.com...[color=blue]
> 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=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]

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Yup thats it .. SQL Everywhere.

SM :)


"William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23RVmO%23 DhGHA.3376@TK2M SFTNGP03.phx.gb l...[color=blue]
> 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?
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>[/color]

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

AHA .. good one !!

- Sahil Malik

http://www.winsmarts.com

http://blah.winsmarts.com

"Frank Rizzo" <none@none.co m> wrote in message
news:%23j9fctDh GHA.4284@TK2MSF TNGP05.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:[color=green]
>> 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[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking compatability
with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".

Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be able
to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to
deploy them at all - easy or not).

This goes right along with my experience with every single MS product I have
ever purchased. Thier slogan should be "When you need it *almost* right."

Oh well.....I'm still looking into the free SQLite. It has an add-in for
VS.Net 2005 support and is not limited to 4GB of data. Oh yeah...it's only
one file (no dependencies) and it's completely free.

I'll let you know how my testing with it goes.

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrum yblog@nospam.co m> wrote in message
news:%23YpMqGFh GHA.5104@TK2MSF TNGP04.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> Yup thats it .. SQL Everywhere.
>
> SM :)
>
>
> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23RVmO%23 DhGHA.3376@TK2M SFTNGP03.phx.gb l...[color=green]
>> 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?
>> | >>
>> | >>
>> | >>
>> | >
>> | >
>> |
>> |
>>
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

[William Stacey [MVP]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

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

Couldn't you use SQL Express for that?

[William Stacey [MVP]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking compatability
| with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".

Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql query
is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your own
host?

| Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be able
| to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to
| deploy them at all - easy or not).

Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is
free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS.
--
wjs

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Yep....but that defeats the whole ease-of-use thing that a no-install
solution like SQLite or SQL\e provides.

Especially when you have a hosted web-app.....SQL\e would be perfect for
that. Nothing to "install" (i.e. register) on the hosts servers.

It's just that MS wants you to pay to do a decent web-app. IMHO, it helps
them control competition somewhat (at least from the little guys) to thier
web-centric offerings. What other reasons could thier be to specifically
disable it under any IIS process? Greed?

As far as I can see....if you're small and have a great idea, MS SQL is
probably NOT the thing to use (at least SQLite is easier to deploy and has
greater capacity than SQL\e or SQL\x).

"William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uycu0lFhGH A.2188@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>| It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS
> | though.
>
> Couldn't you use SQL Express for that?
>
>[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?


"William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eE$gLoFhGH A.3924@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking compatability
> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".
>
> Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql
> query
> is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your
> own
> host?[/color]

Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed him
earlier today.
[color=blue]
>
> | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be
> able
> | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to
> | deploy them at all - easy or not).
>
> Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is
> free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS.[/color]

It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For ASP.Net
hosted webservers, it sucks.

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Okay .. why does SQL express suck? It doesn't suck .. !!! It runs on a full
fledged SQL engine, sure deployment is a pain, but migrating to a fullblown
SQL Server is relatively painless.


Also, can you elaborate -
[color=blue][color=green]
>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>compatabili ty
>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".[/color][/color]


?

- Sahil Malik

http://www.winsmarts.com

http://blah.winsmarts.com

"ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
news:mo7fg.6688 3$MM6.52917@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=blue]
>
> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eE$gLoFhGH A.3924@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>compatabili ty
>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".
>>
>> Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql
>> query
>> is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your
>> own
>> host?[/color]
>
> Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed
> him earlier today.
>[color=green]
>>
>> | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be
>> able
>> | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it to
>> | deploy them at all - easy or not).
>>
>> Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is
>> free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS.[/color]
>
> It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For
> ASP.Net hosted webservers, it sucks.
>
>[/color]

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Ljh,
[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]

I see not much reasons why you cannot use better the Jet Engine over SQL
Express, if you want:

That every user can remove the database file at any time he wants
That your data is processed relatively slow
That you cannot use it as an InterNet database withouth webservice or
other webpart
To tell the path at deployment time
Create extra program parts for as the user wants to relocate his
database
Not much security of the data.
To deploy an empty database (wich is great if a user reinstalls and
overwrites his exising database)

Just my thought,

Cor

[William \(Bill\) Vaughn]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot. It's
not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is.
Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It now
offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL Everywhere,
SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes the Reporting
Services engine as well as Full Text Search.

If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum.

--
_______________ _______________ ______
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker

https://www.betav.com/blog/billva

https://www.betav.com

Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
_______________ _______________ ____

"ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
news:_J4fg.6648 7$MM6.19820@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=blue]
> Awesome!
>
> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS
> though.
>
> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
> development so much easier!
>
> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at
> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server.
>
> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses
> grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten the bottom
> line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a
> "grown up" version of SQL Server.
>
> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king.
>
> Thanks for the great link!
>
>
>
> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Odp%23lzDh GHA.3376@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..[color=green]
>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released
>> this
>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls.
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/ar...whereInfo.aspx
>>
>> --
>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>
>> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
>> news:Dm2fg.6618 8$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]
>
>[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

The fact that you can't control SQL Express (due to the fact that you
usually don't control the HOSTED servers) and that you could get more data
into SQL Everywhere (or SQLite for that matter) simply by using the
available disk space than you do with most hosted website's db plans (which
will include hosted SQL Express servers) sucks!

The fact that MS has an edition of Mobile SQL that they are making available
for everything except IIS use sucks!

The fact that Micrsoft added code to SQL Everywhere to PREVENT it from being
used in an IIS process sucks! What about that don't you get?

Microsoft again makes a valiant run downfield with the ball.....only to stop
and sit on the 1 yard line.


"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrum yblog@nospam.co m> wrote in message
news:OrGZK8GhGH A.4080@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Okay .. why does SQL express suck? It doesn't suck .. !!! It runs on a
> full fledged SQL engine, sure deployment is a pain, but migrating to a
> fullblown SQL Server is relatively painless.
>
>
> Also, can you elaborate -
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>>compatabilit y
>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".[/color][/color]
>
>
> ?
>
> - Sahil Malik
> http://www.winsmarts.com
> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>
>
>
>
> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
> news:mo7fg.6688 3$MM6.52917@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=green]
>>
>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:eE$gLoFhGH A.3924@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...[color=darkred]
>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>>compatabilit y
>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".
>>>
>>> Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql
>>> query
>>> is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from your
>>> own
>>> host?[/color]
>>
>> Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed
>> him earlier today.
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be
>>> able
>>> | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it
>>> to
>>> | deploy them at all - easy or not).
>>>
>>> Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is
>>> free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS.[/color]
>>
>> It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For
>> ASP.Net hosted webservers, it sucks.
>>
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

[ljh]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

"INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased.


"William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveTh is@nwlink.com> wrote in message
news:OmWkZkHhGH A.1324@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot.
> It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is.
> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It now
> offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL Everywhere,
> SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes the Reporting
> Services engine as well as Full Text Search.
>
> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum.
>
> --
> _______________ _______________ ______
> William (Bill) Vaughn
> Author, Mentor, Consultant
> Microsoft MVP
> INETA Speaker
> www.betav.com/blog/billva
> www.betav.com
> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
> _______________ _______________ ____
>
> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
> news:_J4fg.6648 7$MM6.19820@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=green]
>> Awesome!
>>
>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS
>> though.
>>
>> That would suck. Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
>> development so much easier!
>>
>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at
>> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server.
>>
>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses
>> grow. And, that's too bad. Doing so would actually fatten the bottom
>> line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a
>> "grown up" version of SQL Server.
>>
>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king.
>>
>> Thanks for the great link!
>>
>>
>>
>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Odp%23lzDh GHA.3376@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..[color=darkred]
>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere. I think will be released
>>> this
>>> summer. 1.4mb with 7 dlls.
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/ar...whereInfo.aspx
>>>
>>> --
>>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>>
>>> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
>>> news:Dm2fg.6618 8$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]
>>
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

[Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

Let's see:

Ability to do asynch apps (Service Broker)
Server model instead of file system model
Complete support for stored procedures
Full SQL Server security model
Ability to run queries as another user, completely isolating the database
from the user
Better support for types in SQL Server than Access (in .NET)
Ability to schedule backups within the engine
Support for more types than Access
Ability to use XML as a datatype with querying capabilities

Is that enough, or should I go on?

--
Gregory A. Beamer

*************** *************** *************** ****
Think Outside the Box!
*************** *************** *************** ****
"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]

[Sahil Malik [MVP C#]]

Re: Why choose SQL Express over Access?

> The fact that Micrsoft added code to SQL Everywhere to PREVENT it from[color=blue]
> being used in an IIS process sucks! What about that don't you get?[/color]

First of all "CALM DOWN".
[color=blue]
> The fact that you can't control SQL Express (due to the fact that you
> usually don't control the HOSTED servers) and that you could get more data
> into SQL Everywhere (or SQLite for that matter) simply by using the
> available disk space than you do with most hosted website's db plans
> (which will include hosted SQL Express servers) sucks![/color]

Moving SQL Express to SQL Server is a peice of cake. I don't see what the
big unsolvable problem here is.

- Sahil Malik [MVP]

http://blah.winsmarts.com

"ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
news:ogbfg.1420 $EX2.833@bignew s5.bellsouth.ne t...[color=blue]
> The fact that you can't control SQL Express (due to the fact that you
> usually don't control the HOSTED servers) and that you could get more data
> into SQL Everywhere (or SQLite for that matter) simply by using the
> available disk space than you do with most hosted website's db plans
> (which will include hosted SQL Express servers) sucks!
>
> The fact that MS has an edition of Mobile SQL that they are making
> available for everything except IIS use sucks!
>
> The fact that Micrsoft added code to SQL Everywhere to PREVENT it from
> being used in an IIS process sucks! What about that don't you get?
>
> Microsoft again makes a valiant run downfield with the ball.....only to
> stop and sit on the 1 yard line.
>
>
> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrum yblog@nospam.co m> wrote in message
> news:OrGZK8GhGH A.4080@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>> Okay .. why does SQL express suck? It doesn't suck .. !!! It runs on a
>> full fledged SQL engine, sure deployment is a pain, but migrating to a
>> fullblown SQL Server is relatively painless.
>>
>>
>> Also, can you elaborate -
>>[color=darkred]
>>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>>>compatabili ty
>>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".[/color]
>>
>>
>> ?
>>
>> - Sahil Malik
>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "ljh" <Some@where.els e> wrote in message
>> news:mo7fg.6688 3$MM6.52917@big news3.bellsouth .net...[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.stacey @gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:eE$gLoFhGH A.3924@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>>>compatabili ty
>>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".
>>>>
>>>> Not sure how they would do that other then via license. I mean a sql
>>>> query
>>>> is not going to look any different coming from asp.net page or from
>>>> your own
>>>> host?
>>>
>>> Not sure.....that's the word I got back from Steve Lasker when I emailed
>>> him earlier today.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> | Sounds all fluffy and sweet....but what it means is that you won't be
>>>> able
>>>> | to use SQL\e to easily deploy webservices (actually you can;t use it
>>>> to
>>>> | deploy them at all - easy or not).
>>>>
>>>> Again, I think you should at least be able to use SQL Express and it is
>>>> free. IMHO, that product is a sweet and generous gift from MS.
>>>
>>> It is....for machines where you can install anything you want. For
>>> ASP.Net hosted webservers, it sucks.
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]