sentiant (10/20/2008)
It sounds like M$ is giving us another hard boiled egg. I'm very disappointed in 2005 to begin with, as 2000 had features that aren't even native to 2005. For instance, Importing data was so much easier in 2000. Now all my DTS' are pretty much worthless unless I want to combine a 2000 package with the 2005 and then I still have to perform most of the work manually.I was also disappointed in your article. You basically gave us a short summary of whats new and whats lacking but couldn't deliver the money shot when it came to saying 2008 is garbage so don't get it.
I mean come on, you basically asked at the end of the article what we thought... Gee, When I read the title of the post in my email I thought you were gonna tell me what I clicked thru to find out.
I agree with the DTS problem.
I can copy a database in 2000 with 3 or 4 clicks.
To copy a database in 2008 is a real pain.
I develop Access .adp applications for our company.
I have created over 150 databases this year. Each one is similar but enough difference that one standard format can not be used.
We just changed from Access 2000 to Access 2007.
We currently use SQL Server 2000 as the back end.
SQL 2000 objects can be modifed from Access 2000 or Access 2007 but SQL 2008 objects can not be modifed.
I am afraid that Access 2010 is droppng the adp projects and enforcing ODBC.
That will require object changes in SQL server to be performed in management studio.
Oh well, in the meantime, we will stick with Office 2007 and SQL 2000 until such time we are forced to make a change.
"When in danger or in doubt. Run in circles, scream and shout!" TANSTAAFL
"Robert A. Heinlein"