Sybase to Access

[aaron.kempf@gmail.com]

Re: Sybase to Access

having physical access to the computer is different than having
physical access to the computer.

and for the record; I use 15-16 character passwords everywhere I go..
_not_ crackable

-Aaron


Master Programmer wrote:

Windows authentication is childishly easy to crack if you have physical
access to the box. There are lots of brute force crackers availble,
they work offline on the SAM file containing the users/passwords. I
bought a used dell box a while ago and didn't have the password. I
found a web site that allows you to boot your PC from a floppy, it then
grabs the sam file and saves it to the floppy. Then you upload the
file to the web site and 24 hours later they send you all of the
usernames and passwords. There are other methods too, including
downloadable ISO files allowing you to create a CD that has a bootable
linux and a brute force cracker and dictionary.
>
The Grand Master
>
>
aaron.kempf@gma il.com wrote:

windows authentication isn't easy to crack if they have physical access

sql authentication is 'impossible to secure'

but that doesn't make windows authentication impossible to secure

how are you going to crack in.. guest accounts? escalation due to trust
of the network account?

I dont let anyone hit the database; they can all do read only through a
cube for all I care

-Aaron



Master Programmer wrote:

At then end of the day the windows authentication system is that easy
to crack if they have physical access, that the only option seems to be
to encrypt the fields using the program
>
The Grand Master
>
aaron.kempf@gma il.com wrote:
and of course you need 'trust for delegation' and setspn


Master Programmer wrote:
Aaron
>
Have you used database encryption for SQL Server before?
>
The Grand Master
>
aaron.kempf@gma il.com wrote:
Master;

Oh I fully agree.
But Access is also a replacement for Crystal Reports.. Access Data
Projects are a very powerful alternative; no DLL hell to play with.

Just simple bound forms.. much much better than VB6; but it's the same
architecture so it's all good

I hate MDB with a vengence.
But ADP is a great way to keep VB6 code without rewriting it.

We're a fully supported platform for VB6 ADO code against SQL Server.
you should check it out sometime..

-Aaron



Master Programmer wrote:
Access is a toy for storing "My CD Collection" or "My Favourite
Ponies". It is not a DB in any sense that that term "DB" is usually
used
in a professional environment.
>
Fucking grow up and use SQL Server.
>
The Grand Master
>
>
codercode wrote:
I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database. However, my
client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase is way
too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase to
Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two databases
co-exist together?

[aaron.kempf@gmail.com]

Re: Sybase to Access

yeah we had to sniff the password hashes for customers.. and then we
had to do this for a couple of hundred clients-- so that we didn't
force them to reset their password :)

not rocket science.
databases can make pretty easy work of it

but it's not practical.

being able to take a server home-- and use brute force and a year to
crack my password:

a) i'll have changed passwords by then
b) you still get a bunch of candidate keys... if you get a hit on my
hash; and you try 10 of them; then you have a trail of failed logons
c) this doesn't mean that Windows NT authentication in a typical
network setup is 'impossible to secure'

Windows NT authentication is _WONDERFUL_ in SQL Server.

and _NO_ it should not be the single logon method for windows apps--

but altogether it is pretty powerful; pretty secure.

I just can't stand SQL Authentication.

70% of the clients I've had in the past 10 years use SQL
Authentication. . that is just flat out fucking ridiculous.

I wish that everyone used mySql-- then you could secure it so that
you're only getting hits from a particular IP address.

it makes a lot of sense; they should really duplicate that
functionality in SQL Server.

-Aaron





Master Programmer wrote:

Windows authentication is childishly easy to crack if you have physical
access to the box. There are lots of brute force crackers availble,
they work offline on the SAM file containing the users/passwords. I
bought a used dell box a while ago and didn't have the password. I
found a web site that allows you to boot your PC from a floppy, it then
grabs the sam file and saves it to the floppy. Then you upload the
file to the web site and 24 hours later they send you all of the
usernames and passwords. There are other methods too, including
downloadable ISO files allowing you to create a CD that has a bootable
linux and a brute force cracker and dictionary.
>
The Grand Master
>
>
aaron.kempf@gma il.com wrote:

windows authentication isn't easy to crack if they have physical access

sql authentication is 'impossible to secure'

but that doesn't make windows authentication impossible to secure

how are you going to crack in.. guest accounts? escalation due to trust
of the network account?

I dont let anyone hit the database; they can all do read only through a
cube for all I care

-Aaron



Master Programmer wrote:

At then end of the day the windows authentication system is that easy
to crack if they have physical access, that the only option seems to be
to encrypt the fields using the program
>
The Grand Master
>
aaron.kempf@gma il.com wrote:
and of course you need 'trust for delegation' and setspn


Master Programmer wrote:
Aaron
>
Have you used database encryption for SQL Server before?
>
The Grand Master
>
aaron.kempf@gma il.com wrote:
Master;

Oh I fully agree.
But Access is also a replacement for Crystal Reports.. Access Data
Projects are a very powerful alternative; no DLL hell to play with.

Just simple bound forms.. much much better than VB6; but it's the same
architecture so it's all good

I hate MDB with a vengence.
But ADP is a great way to keep VB6 code without rewriting it.

We're a fully supported platform for VB6 ADO code against SQL Server.
you should check it out sometime..

-Aaron



Master Programmer wrote:
Access is a toy for storing "My CD Collection" or "My Favourite
Ponies". It is not a DB in any sense that that term "DB" is usually
used
in a professional environment.
>
Fucking grow up and use SQL Server.
>
The Grand Master
>
>
codercode wrote:
I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database. However, my
client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase is way
too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase to
Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two databases
co-exist together?

[sstory]

Re: Sybase to Access

Not sure of the question.

1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps and give you
"access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if that were possible
instead of just getting the drivers to connect directly to Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...

I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database. However, my
client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase is way
too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase to
Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two databases
co-exist together?
>

[RobinS]

Re: Sybase to Access

Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
performance was fine.

It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
Access won't kill him.

Robin S.
---------------------------------
"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
news:uLrM4NpLHH A.4848@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...

Not sure of the question.
>
1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps and give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if that were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect directly to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...

>I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database. However, my
>client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase is way
>too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase to
>Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two
>databases
>co-exist together?
>>

>
>

[aaron.kempf@gmail.com]

Re: Sybase to Access

I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a half dozen
users.

MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.

If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then _MAYBE_ I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into VB 2005.

As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't support SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:

Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
performance was fine.
>
It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
Access won't kill him.
>
Robin S.
---------------------------------
"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
news:uLrM4NpLHH A.4848@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...

Not sure of the question.

1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps and give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if that were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect directly to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...

I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database. However, my
client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase is way
too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase to
Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two
databases
co-exist together?
>

[RobinS]

Re: Sybase to Access

Bummer for you. I've had VB desktop applications using Access as a
back-end that had 75 users and 500MB+ of data, with no problem
whatsoever. There's no reason that wouldn't work for sstory, if he
didn't want to use SQLServer.

Robin S.
----------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167768642 .603440.102460@ 42g2000cwt.goog legroups.com...

I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a half
dozen
users.
>
MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.
>
If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then _MAYBE_
I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into VB 2005.
>
As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't support SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:

>Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
>I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
>performance was fine.
>>
>It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
>Access won't kill him.
>>
>Robin S.
>---------------------------------
>"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
>news:uLrM4NpLH HA.4848@TK2MSFT NGP04.phx.gbl.. .

Not sure of the question.
>
1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not
recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps and
give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if that
were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect directly to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...
>I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database. However,
>my
>client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase is
>way
>too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase to
>Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two
>databases
>co-exist together?
>>
>
>

>

[aaron.kempf@gmail.com]

Re: Sybase to Access

I disagree.

I don't know or care how much effort it took; all I know is that ADP is
a better platform.

MDB is for lamers and fucking retards.

it makes no sense for newbies to learn TWO DIFFERENT DIALECTS OF SQL.

That is the FATAL FLAW WITH MDB-- It shouldn't be targeted at Junior
Developers.
And it's not reliable enough for normal developers.

I just don't believe you when you say that you've had 75 users and
500mb data.

I've had a dozen MDB files with a total of 1.5 gb crap out left and
right.
and I've had a single MDB split properly into front end and back end
(gag) that can't support a half dozen users.

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:

Bummer for you. I've had VB desktop applications using Access as a
back-end that had 75 users and 500MB+ of data, with no problem
whatsoever. There's no reason that wouldn't work for sstory, if he
didn't want to use SQLServer.
>
Robin S.
----------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167768642 .603440.102460@ 42g2000cwt.goog legroups.com...

I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a half
dozen
users.

MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.

If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then _MAYBE_
I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into VB 2005.

As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't support SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:

Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
performance was fine.
>
It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
Access won't kill him.
>
Robin S.
---------------------------------
"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
news:uLrM4NpLHH A.4848@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...
Not sure of the question.

1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not
recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps and
give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if that
were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect directly to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...
I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database. However,
my
client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase is
way
too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase to
Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two
databases
co-exist together?
>

[RobinS]

Re: Sybase to Access

Well, it doesn't matter to me whether or not you believe me. The
application is still running 2 years after I left, and the database
is now about 900MB. Their only complaint is how long it takes to
compact it...

Robin S.
--------------------------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167866804 .486388.155330@ i80g2000cwc.goo glegroups.com.. .

>I disagree.
>
I don't know or care how much effort it took; all I know is that ADP
is
a better platform.
>
MDB is for lamers and fucking retards.
>
it makes no sense for newbies to learn TWO DIFFERENT DIALECTS OF SQL.
>
That is the FATAL FLAW WITH MDB-- It shouldn't be targeted at Junior
Developers.
And it's not reliable enough for normal developers.
>
I just don't believe you when you say that you've had 75 users and
500mb data.
>
I've had a dozen MDB files with a total of 1.5 gb crap out left and
right.
and I've had a single MDB split properly into front end and back end
(gag) that can't support a half dozen users.
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:

>Bummer for you. I've had VB desktop applications using Access as a
>back-end that had 75 users and 500MB+ of data, with no problem
>whatsoever. There's no reason that wouldn't work for sstory, if he
>didn't want to use SQLServer.
>>
>Robin S.
>----------------------------------
><aaron.kempf@g mail.comwrote in message
>news:116776864 2.603440.102460 @42g2000cwt.goo glegroups.com.. .

I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a half
dozen
users.
>
MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.
>
If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then
_MAYBE_
I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into VB
2005.
>
As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't support
SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:
>Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
>I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
>performance was fine.
>>
>It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
>Access won't kill him.
>>
>Robin S.
>---------------------------------
>"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
>news:uLrM4NpLH HA.4848@TK2MSFT NGP04.phx.gbl.. .
Not sure of the question.
>
1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not
recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps
and
give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if
that
were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect directly
to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...
>I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database.
>However,
>my
>client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase
>is
>way
>too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase
>to
>Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two
>databases
>co-exist together?
>>
>
>
>

>

[aaron.kempf@gmail.com]

Re: Sybase to Access

rofl

you fucking retards still kick users out of the databases in order to
compact and repair?

how fucking antiquated

I mean seriously your little bullshit dime-store solutions aren't
trouble free.

they just send their work elsewhere since you're a fucking newbie
Access baby mother fucker

-Aaron



RobinS wrote:

Well, it doesn't matter to me whether or not you believe me. The
application is still running 2 years after I left, and the database
is now about 900MB. Their only complaint is how long it takes to
compact it...
>
Robin S.
--------------------------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167866804 .486388.155330@ i80g2000cwc.goo glegroups.com.. .

I disagree.

I don't know or care how much effort it took; all I know is that ADP
is
a better platform.

MDB is for lamers and fucking retards.

it makes no sense for newbies to learn TWO DIFFERENT DIALECTS OF SQL.

That is the FATAL FLAW WITH MDB-- It shouldn't be targeted at Junior
Developers.
And it's not reliable enough for normal developers.

I just don't believe you when you say that you've had 75 users and
500mb data.

I've had a dozen MDB files with a total of 1.5 gb crap out left and
right.
and I've had a single MDB split properly into front end and back end
(gag) that can't support a half dozen users.

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:

Bummer for you. I've had VB desktop applications using Access as a
back-end that had 75 users and 500MB+ of data, with no problem
whatsoever. There's no reason that wouldn't work for sstory, if he
didn't want to use SQLServer.
>
Robin S.
----------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167768642 .603440.102460@ 42g2000cwt.goog legroups.com...
I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a half
dozen
users.

MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.

If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then
_MAYBE_
I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into VB
2005.

As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't support
SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:
Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
performance was fine.
>
It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
Access won't kill him.
>
Robin S.
---------------------------------
"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
news:uLrM4NpLHH A.4848@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...
Not sure of the question.

1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not
recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps
and
give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if
that
were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect directly
to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...
I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database.
However,
my
client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and Sybase
is
way
too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a Sybase
to
Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these two
databases
co-exist together?
>

[RobinS]

Re: Sybase to Access

No, they usually compact it in the middle of the night.

Try not to be unnecessarily abusive, Aaron. You don't comprehend
why the solution was chosen, and I'm not going to explain it to you,
because all you'll do is whine about VB going away.

Robin S.
VB2005.Net programmer
----------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167887286 .837763.116380@ 42g2000cwt.goog legroups.com...

rofl
>
you fucking retards still kick users out of the databases in order to
compact and repair?
>
how fucking antiquated
>
I mean seriously your little bullshit dime-store solutions aren't
trouble free.
>
they just send their work elsewhere since you're a fucking newbie
Access baby mother fucker
>
-Aaron
>
>
>
RobinS wrote:

>Well, it doesn't matter to me whether or not you believe me. The
>application is still running 2 years after I left, and the database
>is now about 900MB. Their only complaint is how long it takes to
>compact it...
>>
>Robin S.
>--------------------------------------------------
><aaron.kempf@g mail.comwrote in message
>news:116786680 4.486388.155330 @i80g2000cwc.go oglegroups.com. ..

>I disagree.
>
I don't know or care how much effort it took; all I know is that
ADP
is
a better platform.
>
MDB is for lamers and fucking retards.
>
it makes no sense for newbies to learn TWO DIFFERENT DIALECTS OF
SQL.
>
That is the FATAL FLAW WITH MDB-- It shouldn't be targeted at
Junior
Developers.
And it's not reliable enough for normal developers.
>
I just don't believe you when you say that you've had 75 users and
500mb data.
>
I've had a dozen MDB files with a total of 1.5 gb crap out left and
right.
and I've had a single MDB split properly into front end and back
end
(gag) that can't support a half dozen users.
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:
>Bummer for you. I've had VB desktop applications using Access as a
>back-end that had 75 users and 500MB+ of data, with no problem
>whatsoever. There's no reason that wouldn't work for sstory, if he
>didn't want to use SQLServer.
>>
>Robin S.
>----------------------------------
><aaron.kempf@g mail.comwrote in message
>news:116776864 2.603440.102460 @42g2000cwt.goo glegroups.com.. .
I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a
half
dozen
users.
>
MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.
>
If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then
_MAYBE_
I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into VB
2005.
>
As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't
support
SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:
>Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
>I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
>performance was fine.
>>
>It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
>Access won't kill him.
>>
>Robin S.
>---------------------------------
>"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
>news:uLrM4NpLH HA.4848@TK2MSFT NGP04.phx.gbl.. .
Not sure of the question.
>
1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not
recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps
and
give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if
that
were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect
directly
to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to
MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...
>I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database.
>However,
>my
>client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and
>Sybase
>is
>way
>too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a
>Sybase
>to
>Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these
>two
>databases
>co-exist together?
>>
>
>
>
>

>

[aaron.kempf@gmail.com]

Re: Sybase to Access

I whine because they killed off vb6.. then they killed off ACCESS by
bringing back DAO

I'm sick and fucking tired of a new data access layer every 12 months

and I refuse-- militantly-- to use DAO again.

that is why I am in the VB newsgroup-- to bitch about the first
misdeed--- the death of VB because now that Access is a dead issue then
I need to bitch up a storm to the 'real vb' lol

as if

vb has been dead for 5 years; and microsoft's lack of commitment to the
language makes me disgusted.

MIcrosofts' first development tool was for BASIC wasn't it?

Why have they turned their back on the worlds most popular programming
language?

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:

No, they usually compact it in the middle of the night.
>
Try not to be unnecessarily abusive, Aaron. You don't comprehend
why the solution was chosen, and I'm not going to explain it to you,
because all you'll do is whine about VB going away.
>
Robin S.
VB2005.Net programmer
----------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167887286 .837763.116380@ 42g2000cwt.goog legroups.com...

rofl

you fucking retards still kick users out of the databases in order to
compact and repair?

how fucking antiquated

I mean seriously your little bullshit dime-store solutions aren't
trouble free.

they just send their work elsewhere since you're a fucking newbie
Access baby mother fucker

-Aaron



RobinS wrote:

Well, it doesn't matter to me whether or not you believe me. The
application is still running 2 years after I left, and the database
is now about 900MB. Their only complaint is how long it takes to
compact it...
>
Robin S.
--------------------------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167866804 .486388.155330@ i80g2000cwc.goo glegroups.com.. .
I disagree.

I don't know or care how much effort it took; all I know is that
ADP
is
a better platform.

MDB is for lamers and fucking retards.

it makes no sense for newbies to learn TWO DIFFERENT DIALECTS OF
SQL.

That is the FATAL FLAW WITH MDB-- It shouldn't be targeted at
Junior
Developers.
And it's not reliable enough for normal developers.

I just don't believe you when you say that you've had 75 users and
500mb data.

I've had a dozen MDB files with a total of 1.5 gb crap out left and
right.
and I've had a single MDB split properly into front end and back
end
(gag) that can't support a half dozen users.

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:
Bummer for you. I've had VB desktop applications using Access as a
back-end that had 75 users and 500MB+ of data, with no problem
whatsoever. There's no reason that wouldn't work for sstory, if he
didn't want to use SQLServer.
>
Robin S.
----------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167768642 .603440.102460@ 42g2000cwt.goog legroups.com...
I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a
half
dozen
users.

MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.

If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then
_MAYBE_
I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into VB
2005.

As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't
support
SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did

-Aaron


RobinS wrote:
Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's nothing.
I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and the
performance was fine.
>
It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but using
Access won't kill him.
>
Robin S.
---------------------------------
"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
news:uLrM4NpLHH A.4848@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...
Not sure of the question.

1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not
recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase perhaps
and
give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access if
that
were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect
directly
to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to
MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...
I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database.
However,
my
client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and
Sybase
is
way
too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a
Sybase
to
Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these
two
databases
co-exist together?
>

[RobinS]

Re: Sybase to Access

Told you so.

Robin S.
------------------------------
<aaron.kempf@gm ail.comwrote in message
news:1167947967 .722859.210390@ s80g2000cwa.goo glegroups.com.. .

>I whine because they killed off vb6.. then they killed off ACCESS by
bringing back DAO
>
I'm sick and fucking tired of a new data access layer every 12 months
>
and I refuse-- militantly-- to use DAO again.
>
that is why I am in the VB newsgroup-- to bitch about the first
misdeed--- the death of VB because now that Access is a dead issue
then
I need to bitch up a storm to the 'real vb' lol
>
as if
>
vb has been dead for 5 years; and microsoft's lack of commitment to
the
language makes me disgusted.
>
MIcrosofts' first development tool was for BASIC wasn't it?
>
Why have they turned their back on the worlds most popular programming
language?
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:

>No, they usually compact it in the middle of the night.
>>
>Try not to be unnecessarily abusive, Aaron. You don't comprehend
>why the solution was chosen, and I'm not going to explain it to you,
>because all you'll do is whine about VB going away.
>>
>Robin S.
>VB2005.Net programmer
>----------------------------------
><aaron.kempf@g mail.comwrote in message
>news:116788728 6.837763.116380 @42g2000cwt.goo glegroups.com.. .

rofl
>
you fucking retards still kick users out of the databases in order
to
compact and repair?
>
how fucking antiquated
>
I mean seriously your little bullshit dime-store solutions aren't
trouble free.
>
they just send their work elsewhere since you're a fucking newbie
Access baby mother fucker
>
-Aaron
>
>
>
RobinS wrote:
>Well, it doesn't matter to me whether or not you believe me. The
>application is still running 2 years after I left, and the
>database
>is now about 900MB. Their only complaint is how long it takes to
>compact it...
>>
>Robin S.
>--------------------------------------------------
><aaron.kempf@g mail.comwrote in message
>news:116786680 4.486388.155330 @i80g2000cwc.go oglegroups.com. ..
>I disagree.
>
I don't know or care how much effort it took; all I know is that
ADP
is
a better platform.
>
MDB is for lamers and fucking retards.
>
it makes no sense for newbies to learn TWO DIFFERENT DIALECTS OF
SQL.
>
That is the FATAL FLAW WITH MDB-- It shouldn't be targeted at
Junior
Developers.
And it's not reliable enough for normal developers.
>
I just don't believe you when you say that you've had 75 users
and
500mb data.
>
I've had a dozen MDB files with a total of 1.5 gb crap out left
and
right.
and I've had a single MDB split properly into front end and back
end
(gag) that can't support a half dozen users.
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:
>Bummer for you. I've had VB desktop applications using Access
>as a
>back-end that had 75 users and 500MB+ of data, with no problem
>whatsoever. There's no reason that wouldn't work for sstory, if
>he
>didn't want to use SQLServer.
>>
>Robin S.
>----------------------------------
><aaron.kempf@g mail.comwrote in message
>news:116776864 2.603440.102460 @42g2000cwt.goo glegroups.com.. .
I've had Access apps with 25 mb of data that can't support a
half
dozen
users.
>
MDB shouldn't be used for a single user nor a single record.
>
If MS had a decade-long policy of preaching SQL over MDB then
_MAYBE_
I
would be willing to accept SQL 2005 _CRAP_ that is built into
VB
2005.
>
As it is; I can't reccomend SQL 2005 _anywhere_ since it's
not
supported on TRANSMETA (_BLADES_ and tablets), it doesn't
support
SQL
Agent; and it doesn't support replication like MSDE 2.0 did
>
-Aaron
>
>
RobinS wrote:
>Why would Access bite with a 30MB database -- that's
>nothing.
>I've had apps with an Access database that was 500MB, and
>the
>performance was fine.
>>
>It would be better to migrate to SQLServer Express, but
>using
>Access won't kill him.
>>
>Robin S.
>---------------------------------
>"sstory" <nothank@no.com wrote in message
>news:uLrM4NpLH HA.4848@TK2MSFT NGP04.phx.gbl.. .
Not sure of the question.
>
1.) Access would really bite with a 30MB database--not
recommended.
2.) Access could use link tables to link to Sybase
perhaps
and
give
you "access" to it. then again, why would you use Access
if
that
were
possible instead of just getting the drivers to connect
directly
to
Sybase.
3.) If it is a problem you might consider migrating to
MySQL.
"codercode" <wong.jamin@gma il.comwrote in message
news:1166120551 .784318.13300@8 0g2000cwy.googl egroups.com...
>I'm working on a Visual Basic .NET using Access database.
>However,
>my
>client already have a 30MB database with Sybase ASA and
>Sybase
>is
>way
>too much for that. Is there anyway I can migrate from a
>Sybase
>to
>Access? or is it possible at all. If it is not, can these
>two
>databases
>co-exist together?
>>
>
>
>
>
>

>