news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
| news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
| >
|
|

"William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> 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/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>
> --
> William Stacey [MVP]
>
> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

"William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uycu0lFhGHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>| 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?
>
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> Awesome!
>
> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS
> though.
>
> That would suck.  Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
> development so much easier!
>
> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at
> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server.
>
> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses
> grow.  And, that's too bad.  Doing so would actually fatten the bottom
> line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a
> "grown up" version of SQL Server.
>
> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king.
>
> Thanks for the great link!
>
>
>
> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere.  I think will be released
>> this
>> summer.  1.4mb with 7 dlls.
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>>
>> --
>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>
>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>> | >
>> |
>> |
>>
>>
>
>

"William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message
news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>> Awesome!
>>
>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under IIS
>> though.
>>
>> That would suck.  Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
>> development so much easier!
>>
>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at
>> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server.
>>
>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small businesses
>> grow.  And, that's too bad.  Doing so would actually fatten the bottom
>> line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses and maybe a
>> "grown up" version of SQL Server.
>>
>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king.
>>
>> Thanks for the great link!
>>
>>
>>
>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere.  I think will be released
>>> this
>>> summer.  1.4mb with 7 dlls.
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>>>
>>> --
>>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>>
>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>>> | >
>>> |
>>> |
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased.
>
>
> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message
> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot.
>> It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is.
>> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It
>> now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL
>> Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes
>> the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search.
>>
>> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum.
>>
>> --
>> ____________________________________
>> William (Bill) Vaughn
>> Author, Mentor, Consultant
>> Microsoft MVP
>> INETA Speaker
>> www.betav.com/blog/billva
>> www.betav.com
>> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> __________________________________
>>
>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>> 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.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> 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/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>>>
>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>>>> | >
>>>> |
>>>> |
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased.
>
> I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same
> pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft.
>
> - Sahil Malik
> http://www.winsmarts.com
> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>
>
>
> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased.
>>
>>
>> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message
>> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> Ah SQL Express can be used with an IIS web site. SQL Everywhere cannot.
>>> It's not designed to do so but SQL Express (still free) is.
>>> Microsoft has done more for small business than any company I know. It
>>> now offers three versions of its database technology for free. SQL
>>> Everywhere, SQL Express and SQL Express Advanced Services that includes
>>> the Reporting Services engine as well as Full Text Search.
>>>
>>> If you just want to bash Microsoft, find some other forum.
>>>
>>> --
>>> ____________________________________
>>> William (Bill) Vaughn
>>> Author, Mentor, Consultant
>>> Microsoft MVP
>>> INETA Speaker
>>> www.betav.com/blog/billva
>>> www.betav.com
>>> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>>> rights.
>>> __________________________________
>>>
>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>> 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.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>> 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/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>>>>
>>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>>>>> | >
>>>>> |
>>>>> |
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:3Cqfg.4977$8e2.2263@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> Of course you must....
>
> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased.
>>
>> I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same
>> pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft.
>>
>> - Sahil Malik
>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>>
>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>>> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased.
>>>
>>>
>>> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message
>>> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>>> Awesome!
>>>>>
>>>>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under
>>>>> IIS though.
>>>>>
>>>>> That would suck.  Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
>>>>> development so much easier!
>>>>>
>>>>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot at
>>>>> succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL Server.
>>>>>
>>>>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small
>>>>> businesses grow.  And, that's too bad.  Doing so would actually fatten
>>>>> the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS licenses
>>>>> and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db king.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the great link!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere.  I think will be
>>>>>> released this
>>>>>> summer.  1.4mb with 7 dlls.
>>>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>>>>>> | >
>>>>>> |
>>>>>> |
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

"William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message
news:O8K6C0RhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Excuse me? Are you accusing us of something? I would make pretty sure
> you're on solid ground before impugning our honesty in a public forum. If
> you really knew me, if you really understood where I have stood for the
> last 20 years, you would not be saying anything about how I coddle
> Microsoft or show bias toward their products. From time to time I have
> been highly critical of Microsoft--even as an employee (for 14 years).
> Microsoft has not always liked to hear what I have said, but they have
> listened--just as they listen to every one with any credibility at all. I
> for one have just finished my 11th book on this subject and yes, this book
> like all the others talks about what works and what does not.
>
> Do you think you fall into that category?
>
> --
> ____________________________________
> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:3Cqfg.4977$8e2.2263@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>> Of course you must....
>>
>> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased.
>>>
>>> I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same
>>> pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft.
>>>
>>> - Sahil Malik
>>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>>> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>> news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>>>> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>> Awesome!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under
>>>>>> IIS though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would suck.  Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
>>>>>> development so much easier!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot
>>>>>> at succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL
>>>>>> Server.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small
>>>>>> businesses grow.  And, that's too bad.  Doing so would actually
>>>>>> fatten the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS
>>>>>> licenses and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db
>>>>>> king.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the great link!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere.  I think will be
>>>>>>> released this
>>>>>>> summer.  1.4mb with 7 dlls.
>>>>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>>>>>>> | >
>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

> I would make pretty sure you're on solid ground before impugning our
> honesty in a public forum. If you really knew me, if you really understood
> where I have stood for the last 20 years, you would not be saying anything
> about how I coddle Microsoft or show bias toward their products. From time
> to time I have been highly critical of Microsoft--even as an employee (for
> 14 years). Microsoft has not always liked to hear what I have said, but
> they have listened--just as they listen to every one with any credibility
> at all. I for one have just finished my 11th book on this subject and yes,
> this book like all the others talks about what works and what does not.
>
> Do you think you fall into that category?
>
> --
> ____________________________________
> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:3Cqfg.4977$8e2.2263@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>> Of course you must....
>>
>> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:u3xKRLRhGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Well, both INETA speakers and MVPs are unbiased.
>>>
>>> I'm an INETA speaker and MVP myself, and nearly don't have the same
>>> pedigree as Bill Vaughn, but I must agree with his views on Microsoft.
>>>
>>> - Sahil Malik
>>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>>> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>> news:aibfg.1442$EX2.652@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>>>> "INETA Speaker" - at least you're unbiased.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:OmWkZkHhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>>> news:_J4fg.66487$MM6.19820@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>> Awesome!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It doesn't look like they'll let us use it to power webservices under
>>>>>> IIS though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would suck.  Allowing its use under IIS would make hosted web
>>>>>> development so much easier!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would let small companies with big ideas give those ideas a shot
>>>>>> at succeeding without spending several thousand dollars for SQL
>>>>>> Server.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But, I don't think MS is all that interested in helping small
>>>>>> businesses grow.  And, that's too bad.  Doing so would actually
>>>>>> fatten the bottom line at MS as the little businesses need more MS
>>>>>> licenses and maybe a "grown up" version of SQL Server.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If they did, who knows, it might even unseat MySQL as the web db
>>>>>> king.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the great link!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:Odp%23lzDhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Another option for you may be SQL Everywhere.  I think will be
>>>>>>> released this
>>>>>>> summer.  1.4mb with 7 dlls.
>>>>>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/stevelasker/archive/2006/04/10/SqlEverywhereInfo.aspx
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> William Stacey [MVP]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:Dm2fg.66188$MM6.13884@bignews3.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.cur***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> | news:1149020977.932902.220830@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.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.
>>>>>>> | >
>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

>
> "William (Bill) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveT***@nwlink.com> wrote in
> message news:O8K6C0RhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> > Excuse me? Are you accusing us of something?
>
> You accussed me, Billy.  Remember this...."If you just want to bash
> Microsoft, find some other forum."?
>
> You take an accusatory tone with me.  You attack my posts without
> reading them (if you had, you'd have seen that the theme here was not
> one of "just bashing Microsoft").  And, YOU have the audacity to ask
> me if I am questioning YOUR integrity?
>
> Well, I am questioning your integrity.

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>
>
>

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>>
>>
>>
>
>

> 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#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

"Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
news:%23rBSlsDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> ljh wrote:
>> 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/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere .
>
> Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll
> never amount to anything.  However, I used the product a couple of years
> ago and it is solid.  It has all the drivers and easy of use and
> surprising performance and all that.
>
>> I don't really trust Borland anyway.  They jumped right in line with the
> I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland.  You got your
> vendors confused.
>
>
>> 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#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:_M4fg.66488$MM6.56651@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> You're right.....  I got Sybase and Borland mixed up.  Must've been that
> whole JBuilder collaboration thing that threw me.
>
> They are definitely not the same company.
>
> "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
> news:%23rBSlsDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> ljh wrote:
>>> 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/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere .
>>
>> Yeah, they change product names every 5 minutes, which is why they'll
>> never amount to anything.  However, I used the product a couple of years
>> ago and it is solid.  It has all the drivers and easy of use and
>> surprising performance and all that.
>>
>>> I don't really trust Borland anyway.  They jumped right in line with the
>> I don't think Sybase has anything to do with Borland.  You got your
>> vendors confused.
>>
>>
>>> 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#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>>>> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:7t2fg.66189$MM6.15646@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
|I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.
|
| The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
| something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) -
| http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere .
|
| I don't really trust Borland anyway.  They jumped right in line with the
| whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they
have
| abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.
|
| They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be
about
| it.
|
| "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
| news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > Short incomplete list of reasons -
| >
| > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
| > users.
| > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
| > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
| > backups *.*)
| > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
| > better T-SQL*.*
| > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
| > - You won't have to compact it as often
| > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
| > - Other reasons.
| >
| > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
| > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all these
| > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
| > anyway.
| >
| > - Sahil Malik
| > http://www.winsmarts.com
| >
| >
| > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
| > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >
| >
|
|

"William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23RVmO%23DhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:7t2fg.66189$MM6.15646@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> |I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.
> |
> | The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
> | something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) -
> | http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere .
> |
> | I don't really trust Borland anyway.  They jumped right in line with the
> | whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they
> have
> | abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.
> |
> | They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be
> about
> | it.
> |
> | "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > Short incomplete list of reasons -
> | >
> | > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to multiple
> | > users.
> | > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
> | > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
> | > backups *.*)
> | > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
> | > better T-SQL*.*
> | > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
> | > - You won't have to compact it as often
> | > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
> | > - Other reasons.
> | >
> | > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
> | > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all
> these
> | > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
> | > anyway.
> | >
> | > - Sahil Malik
> | > http://www.winsmarts.com
> | >
> | >
> | > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> | > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23YpMqGFhGHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Yup thats it .. SQL Everywhere.
>
> SM :)
>
>
> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23RVmO%23DhGHA.3376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:7t2fg.66189$MM6.15646@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>> |I can't find anything on SQL Anywhere - even on the Sybase site.
>> |
>> | The closest I can get is a SQL Anywhere link that actually shows you
>> | something called "Remoteware" (whatever the hell that is) -
>> | http://www.sybase.com/products/mobilesolutions/sqlanywhere .
>> |
>> | I don't really trust Borland anyway.  They jumped right in line with
>> the
>> | whole .Net mantra - when they had a better way of doing things and they
>> have
>> | abandoned Kylix without ever admitting to doing so.
>> |
>> | They do enough to keep the Borland name alive....but that seems to be
>> about
>> | it.
>> |
>> | "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in
>> message
>> | news:uARMMlChGHA.1508@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> | > Short incomplete list of reasons -
>> | >
>> | > - SQL Express (or SQL Server in general) will scale better to
>> multiple
>> | > users.
>> | > - It will give you a "way out" when your DB exceeds 4GB
>> | > - It will be easier to maintain from a DBA point of view (centralized
>> | > backups *.*)
>> | > - It will give you a much richer feature set - notification, SQLCLR,
>> | > better T-SQL*.*
>> | > - It will give you better performance (No OleDb necessary)
>> | > - You won't have to compact it as often
>> | > - Better support for data types/indexes etc. etc.
>> | > - Other reasons.
>> | >
>> | > The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment". And
>> | > frankly SQL Anywhere (or was it everywhere - I loose track in all
>> these
>> | > name changes) should be a better choice for desktop-ish applications
>> | > anyway.
>> | >
>> | > - Sahil Malik
>> | > http://www.winsmarts.com
>> | >
>> | >
>> | > "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> | > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>> | >>
>> | >>
>> | >>
>> | >
>> | >
>> |
>> |
>>
>>
>
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:mo7fg.66883$MM6.52917@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>
> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eE$gLoFhGHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>| 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?
>
> 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.
>
>

"Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OrGZK8GhGHA.4080@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> 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 -
>
>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>>compatability
>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".
>
>
> ?
>
> - Sahil Malik
> http://www.winsmarts.com
> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>
>
>
>
> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:mo7fg.66883$MM6.52917@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:eE$gLoFhGHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>| 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?
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:ogbfg.1420$EX2.833@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> The fact that you can't control SQL Express (due to the fact that you
> usually don't control the HOSTED servers) and that you could get more data
> into SQL Everywhere (or SQLite for that matter) simply by using the
> available disk space than you do with most hosted website's db plans
> (which will include hosted SQL Express servers) sucks!
>
> The fact that MS has an edition of Mobile SQL that they are making
> available for everything except IIS use sucks!
>
> The fact that Micrsoft added code to SQL Everywhere to PREVENT it from
> being used in an IIS process sucks!  What about that don't you get?
>
> Microsoft again makes a valiant run downfield with the ball.....only to
> stop and sit on the 1 yard line.
>
>
> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:OrGZK8GhGHA.4080@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Okay .. why does SQL express suck? It doesn't suck .. !!! It runs on a
>> full fledged SQL engine, sure deployment is a pain, but migrating to a
>> fullblown SQL Server is relatively painless.
>>
>>
>> Also, can you elaborate -
>>
>>>>| Got confirmation from MS that they're deliberately breaking
>>>>compatability
>>>> | with SQL\e running under IIS - they call it "soft-blocking".
>>
>>
>> ?
>>
>> - Sahil Malik
>> http://www.winsmarts.com
>> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:mo7fg.66883$MM6.52917@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>
>>> "William Stacey [MVP]" <william.sta***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:eE$gLoFhGHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>| 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?
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

"Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
news:%23j9fctDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> 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.
>
> 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

"Jos Roijakkers" <j.roijakk***@qred-it.nl> wrote in message
news:5d4a1f3de97e8c852fad9beee28@news.microsoft.com...
>> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>
> This is not true. SQL Express runs under XP Home as well (at least it does
> on my machine). However, it does not support remote connections by
> default.
>
>

"_DD" <_@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:octr72ll2st47a5ocsnrohkfepa60karu4@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 30 May 2006 15:49:50 -0700, Frank Rizzo <n***@none.com> wrote:
>
>>Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>>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.
>
> There are lots of places where an app that normally runs on high-end
> XP Pro machines would have to run on XP Home as well.  Does this mean
> that applications must fit the common denominator: MSDE?   I didn't
> think MSDE was still supported.
>
> And what about XP Media Center?  I'd love to find out about future
> plans to adapt to MC and Home editions, assuming there is no way to
> target them now.
>

"Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
news:%23j9fctDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> 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.
>
> 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

>
>
> "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
> news:%23j9fctDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>>> 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.
>> 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
>
>

"Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
news:OhHD3NahGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> steve wrote:
>> Frank,
>> Can you point to something that documents your assertion that SQL Express
>> does not run on XP Home?  Runs fine on my XP Home test machine....Haven't
>> been able to test access across a network to SQL/e on XP Home.
>
> Steve,
>
> I stand corrected.  I just looked at the requirements page:
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/sysreqs.mspx
>
> and they just mention windows xp.  The page must have changed, because
> other people complained about it.  Here is an article from database
> journal when SQL Express came out says winxp pro.
> http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/3492296
>
> I guess they changed it.
>
>
>>
>>
>> "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23j9fctDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>> 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
>>

"steve" <noemail> wrote in message
news:%23bES2ElhGHA.764@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Frank,
>
> We had just about decided to use SQL Express for our next project when I
> saw your post.  Since we need to support XP Home and Pro, I was a bit
> concerned and just wanted to make sure we were making the right choice.
>
> Steve
>
>
> "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
> news:OhHD3NahGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> steve wrote:
>>> Frank,
>>> Can you point to something that documents your assertion that SQL
>>> Express does not run on XP Home?  Runs fine on my XP Home test
>>> machine....Haven't been able to test access across a network to SQL/e on
>>> XP Home.
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> I stand corrected.  I just looked at the requirements page:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/sysreqs.mspx
>>
>> and they just mention windows xp.  The page must have changed, because
>> other people complained about it.  Here is an article from database
>> journal when SQL Express came out says winxp pro.
>> http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mssql/article.php/3492296
>>
>> I guess they changed it.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Frank Rizzo" <n***@none.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23j9fctDhGHA.4284@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>>>>> 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.
>>>> 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
>>>
>

"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:e8IRFZWhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Hi Sahil,
>
>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment".
>
> You still have to install jet engine though (dll hell, registry, com, you
> name it)...
> Or did you mean FBD for database files?
>
> BTW, i liked the pig anecdote :-)
>
> --
> Miha Markic [MVP C#]
> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:0Gzfg.55167$QU3.13169@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
> I'm not so sure about that.
>
> Isn't the MDAC just a related set of DLLs?  In many cases, you can simply
> place dependent DLLs in the same directory as your exe and all will run
> just fine - no registering amything and no chance that "DLL Hell" (which I
> don't believe exists) can getcha.
>
> I may try this out myself on a clean box and see......
>
> "Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
> news:e8IRFZWhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Hi Sahil,
>>
>>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment".
>>
>> You still have to install jet engine though (dll hell, registry, com, you
>> name it)...
>> Or did you mean FBD for database files?
>>
>> BTW, i liked the pig anecdote :-)
>>
>> --
>> Miha Markic [MVP C#]
>> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
>> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
>>
>
>

"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:e8IRFZWhGHA.1324@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Hi Sahil,
>
>> The only advantage Access gives you is "File based deployment".
>
> You still have to install jet engine though (dll hell, registry, com, you
> name it)...
> Or did you mean FBD for database files?
>
> BTW, i liked the pig anecdote :-)
>
> --
> Miha Markic [MVP C#]
> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
>

"Miha Markic [MVP C#]" <miha at rthand com> wrote in message
news:%23RLqaaYhGHA.3904@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> "Sahil Malik [MVP C#]" <contactmethrumyblog@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:%239j92sXhGHA.3572@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> pig anecdote?
>
> "Bill, it took me a while to realize this, but I think you're wrestling
> with
> a pig. He is enjoying it, and you're getting dirty. "
>
>> Re: the jet engine etc. - yeah but most machines have it.
>
> It is enough if one (target) machine might be missing jet. :-)
>
> --
> Miha Markic [MVP C#]
> RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
> Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/
>
>

> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
> >
> >
> >

news:1149739454.760186.156120@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!
>
> I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
> learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
> to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
>
>
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>

> With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting over
> the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)
>
> - Sahil Malik [MVP]
> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>
>
>
>
>
> <b**@datasync.com> wrote in message
> news:1149739454.760186.156120@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!
> >
> > I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
> > learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
> > to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
> >
> >
> > Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
> >> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> >> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >

"Bob" <b**@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:1150289890.978613.138050@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Sahil --
>
> Excellent idea! I wrestled for a long time with trying to use Access
> and when the match was over, I realized that getting Access to work
> under "OleDb" was as hard or harder than just learning SQL!! I am now
> riding the helicopter and -- you absolutely won't believe this -- had a
> bad dream last night that I WAS in a helicopter and just barely
> avoiding crashing into trees, buildings, and power lines.
>
> btw, I arrived at your web site along the way in my Access/Sql travels,
> and found your code about creating databases and tables in SQL using
> VB.NET very helpful. Thanks so much.
>
>
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting
>> over
>> the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)
>>
>> - Sahil Malik [MVP]
>> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <b**@datasync.com> wrote in message
>> news:1149739454.760186.156120@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!
>> >
>> > I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
>> > learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
>> > to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
>> >
>> >
>> > Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> >> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> >> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>

> With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting over
> the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)
>
> - Sahil Malik [MVP]
> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>
>
>
>
>
> <b**@datasync.com> wrote in message
> news:1149739454.760186.156120@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!
> >
> > I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
> > learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
> > to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
> >
> >
> > Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
> >> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> >> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >

"Bob" <b**@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:1150291103.665688.154730@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
> btw, what does "MSFT" stand for?
>
> Thanks,

"Bob" <b**@datasync.com> wrote in message
news:1150291103.665688.154730@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Sahil --
>
> After writing my last reply to your message, I still can't believe that
> I had the helicopter dream last night. I rode in a helicopter once in
> my life, and that was about 30 years ago. I have NEVER (that I can
> remember) ever had a helicopter dream -- until last night. I haven't
> checked the time of your message, but I suspect that my dream must have
> occurred after you wrote me your message. I really wonder if there is
> some "medium" out there that carries brain waves around, or something,
> whereby my subconcious received some glint of your thought before I
> actually read it. WOW!
>
> btw, what does "MSFT" stand for?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> With the pace at which MSFT is releasing new stuff, I suggest getting
>> over
>> the concept of climbing mountains and investing in a helicopter. :)
>>
>> - Sahil Malik [MVP]
>> http://blah.winsmarts.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <b**@datasync.com> wrote in message
>> news:1149739454.760186.156120@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > The best reason for guys like me: I ALREADY KNOW HOW TO USE ACCESS!!!
>> >
>> > I've just obtained vb.net express and I'm having enough trouble
>> > learning how to use it (and un-learning VB6). Right now, I don't want
>> > to climb another mountain while I'm climbing this one.
>> >
>> >
>> > Sahil Malik [MVP C#] wrote:
>> >> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
>> >> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>

"John B" <jbngspam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:447ccdf6_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> ljh wrote:
>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
>> to work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
>> dependencies?
>>
>>
>>
> Sql Express is a lot more performant and scaleable than access.
> If you get a db size over 1/2 GB or so in access you will probably run
> into trouble with corruptions etc.
> If you eventually need to upgrade to full Sql Server then its a straight
> backup / restore operation of the database and you are up and running.
> If you only need and will only ever need a very simple db mechanism then
> access might be the way  to go.
>
> JB

"ljh" wrote:

> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
> work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies?
>
>
>
>

"Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]" <pbromberg@yahoo.nospammin.com> wrote in message
news:EAA36952-A294-48B8-9AC0-698C8852E184@microsoft.com...
> 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:
>
>> Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application
>> to
>> work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no
>> dependencies?
>>
>>
>>
>>

> 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:
>
> > Why would you choose SQL Express (which requires an installed application to
> > work) over the simplicity of an Access database which has no dependencies?
> >
> >
> >
> >

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>
>
>

"Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamMgbworld@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote in
message news:O6q4onKhGHA.4144@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>>
>>
>>
>
>

>
>
> "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamMgbworld@comcast.netNoSpamM>
> wrote in message news:O6q4onKhGHA.4144@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> > 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" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> > news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>
>
>

"ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>
>
>

"Miro" <miron***@golden.net> wrote in message
news:%23lRxLy8iGHA.3588@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>A quick question...
>
> An mdb file lets you supply a password - so you can only allow your
> application from accessing / viewing the data.
>
> Can you do this with SQL Express / Light / ... other   ?
>
> I am starting to get the feeling you cannot lock down the db with SQL
> Express as you can a normal mdb?
>
> Thank you
>
> Miro
>
>
>
> "ljh" <S***@where.else> wrote in message
> news:kP1fg.66184$MM6.44395@bignews3.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?
>>
>>
>>
>
>