August 5, 2011 at 4:11 pm
I am currently working with SQL server for my current job, but still am not an expert. As you know SQL server is very broad and deep sets of multiple technologies that will get bigger and broader.
I am beginning to wonder, will it be wiser to shift my area of concentration from SQL server to Microsoft Access? The reason being that large # of small to medium, and even big fortune 500 companies cannot operate without Access. I know that some local governments' detention center are still operating with Access for inmate management. Another reason is that it's easier and takes less time to develop expertise in my opinion.
Your opinion?
August 5, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Major paycut and limitations as to what you can do with MS Access.
It takes time to be an expert in either, honestly. You're right, MSAccess is a powerful tool for smaller businesses, but do you want a job with a company that has nowhere for you to go once you've got them on track?
MSAccess is usually where you start, not where you end up, if you have the choice.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
August 5, 2011 at 5:31 pm
Also consider that most DBAs do not consider Access as a Database. It is something more typically used by business persons to achieve a short term goal without long-term planning.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
August 7, 2011 at 11:39 am
Well, IMHO, at least to me, I don't care at all about where the company is going or whether it's a long term or short term solution. In this day and age, the management at the companies are over-stretching the limits of free and cheap solutions before considering enterprise level solutions. In these kind of situations, what I'm interested in is whether my skill will get me a job and retain job with least competition and most ease whether it be MS Access or SQL or mySQL or whatever.
August 7, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Sql server has sql express R2 which allows you to store 10 GB of data (5 times more than access last time I checked).
That version is free and only has CPU and RAM limitations. Extremely viable replacement for access... which can still be used as the front end rather than data store.
August 8, 2011 at 3:00 pm
It's been a few years since I've had to work with Access but I don't miss it much. There were several shortcomings such as 1) Trying to do complex queries in that awful query designer, 2) the database expanding everytime a temporary table is created and having to contract it manually, and 3) The possibility of the entire database becoming corrupt and unusuable.
Given a choice and especially with the advent of Reporting Services, I would never choose a career in Access as opposed to SQL Server.
August 9, 2011 at 5:17 am
Also consider that most DBAs do not consider Access as a Database
Access may not be an enterprise level database, but it is a database. Like any tool, there are things it is very appropriate for, and other things for which it is not at all suited. I have seen lots of "tiny" databases put on SQL Server that should have been Access databases. Instead they sucked time and resources from the databases that should have been on there.
Personally, I enjoy working with both.
August 9, 2011 at 5:26 am
RonKyle (8/9/2011)
Also consider that most DBAs do not consider Access as a Database
Access may not be an enterprise level database, but it is a database. Like any tool, there are things it is very appropriate for, and other things for which it is not at all suited. I have seen lots of "tiny" databases put on SQL Server that should have been Access databases. Instead they sucked time and resources from the databases that should have been on there.
Personally, I enjoy working with both.
+1 Actually Access used as front-end + sql server as back end is a dream to develop in. I might preffer SSRS for reporting capabilities but only because I've not really explored the access reports that much.
August 9, 2011 at 5:40 am
Access would probably pay no more than 60% of what SQL pays. Myself, and many DBA's like me would not consider Access to be a database and a person who work in access is a Access Developer, not in any form a DBA. Sorry, but it's the brutal truth. Besides, I'm not sure is access is even technically a RDBMS on the back end.
/* ----------------------------- */
Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!
August 9, 2011 at 8:17 am
As someone that has been around the industry since the 0.1b days of Access and Sql Server 7 and before...(the brain fogs with age sometimes) the question you pose is not an easy one to answer.
While it is true that many small and medium size companies have and are using Access, finding jobs with them may not be the easiest thing to accomplish.
While I have to agree that where the opportunity presents itself, using Access as a front end to a SQL back-end; whether express or enterprise is a pleasure to work with and in, the reality of finding businesses that will pay a living wage for someone with Access skills compared to someone with SQL skills in most areas in the country today is like searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack.
My two cents is to concentrate on SQL and if you are targeting smaller businesses as a generalist, not specifically as a DBA, then get up to speed with .NET and web based access to data.
August 9, 2011 at 8:27 am
I never reall had troubles getting jobs in access and I was able to negociate decent rates (consulting). What part of the world are you in?
August 9, 2011 at 8:38 am
South Central Pennsylvania now, used to live in the North Eastern Part of the state. I was only commenting on the current state of the economy at this time. Over the years, throughout the country, I did some extensive work with Access as the base, but that was as a consultant. As far as job opportunities went, and are at the present time, the focus seemed to be strictly in the SQL arena.
The pay differential between the few Access jobs I see in the area at this time and even entry level SQL positions is as much as $20K per year.
August 9, 2011 at 8:40 am
jd 60382 (8/9/2011)
South Central Pennsylvania now, used to live in the North Eastern Part of the state. I was only commenting on the current state of the economy at this time. Over the years, throughout the country, I did some extensive work with Access as the base, but that was as a consultant. As far as job opportunities went, and are at the present time, the focus seemed to be strictly in the SQL arena.
Thanks for the clarifications. You can move to Montreal, we're short on just about any IT jobs.
August 9, 2011 at 8:45 am
Now there is a thought, my wife worked in Canada for about 6 years in the Nuclear industry and has often said she would like to return. What I love most now-a-days is finding ways to provide solutions for people that allow them new and different insights on the data they have locked away. Most of what I have been doing the past two years is creating web based dashboards that provide live data for executive and sales teams.
August 9, 2011 at 8:46 am
Having lived there, that does not surprise me. However, in major IT centers, from the emails I get for recruitrers, Access jobs pay in the range of $30/hour (1099); whereas SQL (even entry level SQL) are $50 minimum, and experienced in SQL is north of $70/hour (1099)
Access is a skill that man administrative assistants have; SQL requires a dedicated DBA
/* ----------------------------- */
Tochter aus Elysium, Wir betreten feuertrunken, Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 25 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply