call.copse wrote: roger.plowman wrote:
... From a developer standpoint Access STOMPS Visual Studio...
I have a few issues with your post overall, which have been brought up by others, but I'm going to say that's a little ripe for me to leave standing uncommented. VS does a wee bit more than DB forms methinks.
Wasn't talking about forms alone. Forms, reports, database design, code. It's all in one place. It's interactive, you can change the code and not have to recompile to see the effect.
Don't get me wrong, I use VS every day. But for example the Access control model is simply better. For example, Access has an AfterUpdate event that fires once, when the focus is lost on a dirty control, whether the change occurred by mouse or by keystroke. .NET controls have the TextChanged event that fires every keystroke. And while that's nice for fine control it's pretty useless for validation when you need the finished product to validate. (And no, there are glitches with how LostFocus events work that make it less than an ideal replacement for AfterUpdate). Not to mention different controls treat things like LostFocus differently. Either it fires in a different sequence in the event chain or the control uses a different event name or something else equally inconsistent.
Access also integrates report design in a way that is nearly identical to form design. And is also interactive. The speed of development between Access and VS is stunning. If it weren't for the security and scaling issues I would have stayed with Access, benign neglect by MS be damned.
Remember, Access was designed to be easy. Easy to use, easy to code, easy to integrate all the required pieces. As an IDE Access is superior to VS, as VS is to vi. Making it easy for beginners (done correctly) makes it easy for developers too.