Discussion Question

Prompt

Based on the information you gathered from the two articles below, discuss whether or not you feel the popularity of Microsoft Office is still being protected by Microsoft Access. Be sure to provide relevant information from the sources above. You are also welcome to conduct your own research.

Microsoft Access 2010 (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2366672,00.asp (Links to an external site

Pros

New features allow databases to be published to the Web. Easier to do complex tasks like macros and calculated fields. Familiar Office interface makes for easy navigation.

Cons

Dependent on SharePoint server for full feature set, including the publishing of Web apps. Help resources severely lacking.

Bottom Line

Access 2010 is the best version of its database software that Microsoft has released, but there are better options out there that don't require Sharepoint server for full functionality.

Microsoft Access 2010 ($139, list), the database component of Office 2010 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($499 direct, ) marks a big departure: a shift from creating desktop applications to Web applications. Access 2010—like Filemaker's Filemaker Pro (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($179-$299 list, ) and Alpha Software's Alpha Five v10 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($249.00-$349.00 direct, )—strives to ease database design for non-programmers by allowing users to get sophisticated applications on the Web up with ease. There's nothing wrong with Access; it's a good option (and it won't cost you a dime if you already have certain versions of Office 2010), but Alpha Five offers greater flexibility, and Filemaker Pro 11 beats all comers when it comes to ease of use.

FileMaker is our current Editor's Choice for database software. FileMaker makes it easy for the average user to get a database created and deployed. Plus, with instant Web publishing it's easy to get simple applications pushed out to the web. FileMaker Pro 11 also eases pushing out more complex, custom apps with FileMaker Server. Access 2010 however, has one thing FileMaker lacks: a true programming environments that allows for more sophisticated development by professionals. This is an ability Access shares with Alpha Five, so it' fairer to compare these two to each other. Access 2010 has caught up with Alpha Five when it comes to implementing Web database publishing—except that to do so, you'll need SharePoint. Alpha Five's solution has all the tools you need already within it to get a database pushed out to the web.

Microsoft Access 2010: The Evolution of Access

Microsoft's move toward database creation simplicity began with Microsoft Access 2003 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($229 list, ), which introduced wizards and other user-friendly features that enabled non-programmers to develop sophisticated applications. Microsoft pushed the "anyone-can-develop" concept a bit further with the very graphics-and-task-oriented Access 2007,which featured the ribbon interface, making for easier navigation.

Microsoft Access 2010: Web Publishing

Access has always been a program for deploying local database applications. Prior to this new version, pushing apps out to the Web using Access required the deployment and configuration of other Microsoft products, such as SQL Server, Active Server Pages and IIS, making the process complex and expensive (given all the licenses required). New tools in Access 2010 let you publish to the Web using the new Web Databases feature. It's a good relatively simple-to-use feature but it requires a back-end SharePoint server—and a SharePoint 2010 server at that. If an organization has a Windows ecosystem already in place with a SharePoint server, this reliance on SharePoint is not much of an issue. If not, the dependency on SharePoint to publish Web apps can be inconvenient. It is worth noting, however, that organizations without SharePoint can opt to use the hosted SharePoint Online.

As mentioned earlier, Filemaker Pro and Alpha Five, on the other hand, include everything you need to get started. Of course, it depends on what you want to publish to the Web, too. Businesses or users requiring more complex applications will find greater flexibility with Access' VBA programming environment or with Alpha Five's Ajax coding capabilities. And for real customization ability, Alpha Five and Access offer more than FileMaker Pro—they have real, underlying programming environments, as opposed to FileMaker's script library.

Browser Control and Backstage View

Access 2010 has other new capabilities, and they make the user experience more fluid. Web Browser Control is one; this feature integrates Web 2.0 into a database, allowing the easy creation of mash-ups based on data. For example, you can build it so that when a user clicks a contact's address, the location is opened within Google Maps. Even more complex tasks like creating macros and calculated fields, as well as expression building, are more intuitive than ever to use.

Another noteworthy new feature is the Backstage View interface. This is a central location to perform common tasks. Backstage View extends across all Office 2010 apps, but I think it's of most value in Access. Savvy Office users know the shortcuts to save, rename, or print a Word or Excel file, so most of them will never use BackStage View to perform common tasks in those apps. In Access, however, Backstage View is more useful, because it's one central location to perform a variety database-associated tasks like Compact or Repair a database or enabling VBA macros. It's a definite improvement to Access' interface.

Templates

The number of templates and sample databases have been expanded; there are over 20 pre-created databases for almost any general business or home purpose. Microsoft has given macros the re-vamped User Account Control treatment in Windows 7, which is satisfying as working with those little snippets of code can get annoying if you have to repeatedly grant them permission to run. With the Trusted Document feature, I only had to apply those macros trust permission just once—no more incessant prompting. I found it a small but welcome change.

My Database

I created a database using the Contacts template. I have to say, as a heavy duty user mostly of Access 2003, I had a problem getting my bearings. A lot has changed since then, but the changes are for the better. I found the Layout views and Table Tools especially useful. The former now works much like a table within a Word document—it's easy to drag and drop attachments and other objects into them. With Table Tools, Access displays a list of commonly used fields that let me drag and drop any common field into a table.

I tested Access 2010's publishing ability (using Backstage View) on a hosted SharePoint server. I simply pointed to the URL of the hosted server and followed the prompts to publish a database. I found the new Compatibility Checker really handy as it checks to ensure that a database is compatible with the Web, and makes remediation suggestions if it isn't.

Help Needs Help

I found the new features as impressive as I found the Help resources unimpressive. Help in Access 2010 is pitiful. Gone is the indexed listing where you can find help on very specific topics. For instance, I typed "table relationships" into Help and got links to various tutorials on database design basics, a guide to Access 2010, and other very general subjects. I couldn't find a specific answer for my query. The lack of a good, structured help system is unfortunate, especially compared to vendors like Alpha Five who offer not just text help, but videos and help-heavy interactive user forums as well. And since Office 2010 is brand-new, there aren't a lot of third-party resources out there yet for users looking for assistance.

Access 2010's new features make it the most polished version yet, but it isn't the killer app that sells Office 2010—Word and Excel will take care of that. Plus, it isn't quite as impressive (or easy to use) as FileMaker Pro or even Intuit's Quickbase (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($250 direct, ). If you're an Access devotee, you will find the new features to be an overall improvement due to the VBA customization, and ability to create front end apps for back-end ODBC database systems. If you aren't an Access fan, there are competitors out there who offer a lot of the same features without the SharePoint dependency. Filemaker Pro is the best for non-programmers, and Alpha Five still has the edge among programmers.

Lynn, S. (2010, July 19). Microsoft Access 2010. Retrieved from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2366672,00.aspPros

New features allow databases to be published to the Web. Easier to do complex tasks like macros and calculated fields. Familiar Office interface makes for easy navigation.

Cons

Dependent on SharePoint server for full feature set, including the publishing of Web apps. Help resources severely lacking.

Bottom Line

Access 2010 is the best version of its database software that Microsoft has released, but there are better options out there that don't require Sharepoint server for full functionality.

Microsoft Access 2010 ($139, list), the database component of Office 2010 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($499 direct, ) marks a big departure: a shift from creating desktop applications to Web applications. Access 2010—like Filemaker's Filemaker Pro (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($179-$299 list, ) and Alpha Software's Alpha Five v10 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($249.00-$349.00 direct, )—strives to ease database design for non-programmers by allowing users to get sophisticated applications on the Web up with ease. There's nothing wrong with Access; it's a good option (and it won't cost you a dime if you already have certain versions of Office 2010), but Alpha Five offers greater flexibility, and Filemaker Pro 11 beats all comers when it comes to ease of use.

FileMaker is our current Editor's Choice for database software. FileMaker makes it easy for the average user to get a database created and deployed. Plus, with instant Web publishing it's easy to get simple applications pushed out to the web. FileMaker Pro 11 also eases pushing out more complex, custom apps with FileMaker Server. Access 2010 however, has one thing FileMaker lacks: a true programming environments that allows for more sophisticated development by professionals. This is an ability Access shares with Alpha Five, so it' fairer to compare these two to each other. Access 2010 has caught up with Alpha Five when it comes to implementing Web database publishing—except that to do so, you'll need SharePoint. Alpha Five's solution has all the tools you need already within it to get a database pushed out to the web.

Microsoft Access 2010: The Evolution of Access

Microsoft's move toward database creation simplicity began with Microsoft Access 2003 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($229 list, ), which introduced wizards and other user-friendly features that enabled non-programmers to develop sophisticated applications. Microsoft pushed the "anyone-can-develop" concept a bit further with the very graphics-and-task-oriented Access 2007,which featured the ribbon interface, making for easier navigation.

Microsoft Access 2010: Web Publishing

Access has always been a program for deploying local database applications. Prior to this new version, pushing apps out to the Web using Access required the deployment and configuration of other Microsoft products, such as SQL Server, Active Server Pages and IIS, making the process complex and expensive (given all the licenses required). New tools in Access 2010 let you publish to the Web using the new Web Databases feature. It's a good relatively simple-to-use feature but it requires a back-end SharePoint server—and a SharePoint 2010 server at that. If an organization has a Windows ecosystem already in place with a SharePoint server, this reliance on SharePoint is not much of an issue. If not, the dependency on SharePoint to publish Web apps can be inconvenient. It is worth noting, however, that organizations without SharePoint can opt to use the hosted SharePoint Online.

As mentioned earlier, Filemaker Pro and Alpha Five, on the other hand, include everything you need to get started. Of course, it depends on what you want to publish to the Web, too. Businesses or users requiring more complex applications will find greater flexibility with Access' VBA programming environment or with Alpha Five's Ajax coding capabilities. And for real customization ability, Alpha Five and Access offer more than FileMaker Pro—they have real, underlying programming environments, as opposed to FileMaker's script library.

Browser Control and Backstage View

Access 2010 has other new capabilities, and they make the user experience more fluid. Web Browser Control is one; this feature integrates Web 2.0 into a database, allowing the easy creation of mash-ups based on data. For example, you can build it so that when a user clicks a contact's address, the location is opened within Google Maps. Even more complex tasks like creating macros and calculated fields, as well as expression building, are more intuitive than ever to use.

Another noteworthy new feature is the Backstage View interface. This is a central location to perform common tasks. Backstage View extends across all Office 2010 apps, but I think it's of most value in Access. Savvy Office users know the shortcuts to save, rename, or print a Word or Excel file, so most of them will never use BackStage View to perform common tasks in those apps. In Access, however, Backstage View is more useful, because it's one central location to perform a variety database-associated tasks like Compact or Repair a database or enabling VBA macros. It's a definite improvement to Access' interface.

Templates

The number of templates and sample databases have been expanded; there are over 20 pre-created databases for almost any general business or home purpose. Microsoft has given macros the re-vamped User Account Control treatment in Windows 7, which is satisfying as working with those little snippets of code can get annoying if you have to repeatedly grant them permission to run. With the Trusted Document feature, I only had to apply those macros trust permission just once—no more incessant prompting. I found it a small but welcome change.

My Database

I created a database using the Contacts template. I have to say, as a heavy duty user mostly of Access 2003, I had a problem getting my bearings. A lot has changed since then, but the changes are for the better. I found the Layout views and Table Tools especially useful. The former now works much like a table within a Word document—it's easy to drag and drop attachments and other objects into them. With Table Tools, Access displays a list of commonly used fields that let me drag and drop any common field into a table.

I tested Access 2010's publishing ability (using Backstage View) on a hosted SharePoint server. I simply pointed to the URL of the hosted server and followed the prompts to publish a database. I found the new Compatibility Checker really handy as it checks to ensure that a database is compatible with the Web, and makes remediation suggestions if it isn't.

Help Needs Help

I found the new features as impressive as I found the Help resources unimpressive. Help in Access 2010 is pitiful. Gone is the indexed listing where you can find help on very specific topics. For instance, I typed "table relationships" into Help and got links to various tutorials on database design basics, a guide to Access 2010, and other very general subjects. I couldn't find a specific answer for my query. The lack of a good, structured help system is unfortunate, especially compared to vendors like Alpha Five who offer not just text help, but videos and help-heavy interactive user forums as well. And since Office 2010 is brand-new, there aren't a lot of third-party resources out there yet for users looking for assistance.

Access 2010's new features make it the most polished version yet, but it isn't the killer app that sells Office 2010—Word and Excel will take care of that. Plus, it isn't quite as impressive (or easy to use) as FileMaker Pro or even Intuit's Quickbase (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. ($250 direct, ). If you're an Access devotee, you will find the new features to be an overall improvement due to the VBA customization, and ability to create front end apps for back-end ODBC database systems. If you aren't an Access fan, there are competitors out there who offer a lot of the same features without the SharePoint dependency. Filemaker Pro is the best for non-programmers, and Alpha Five still has the edge among programmers.

Lynn, S. (2010, July 19). Microsoft Access 2010. Retrieved from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2366672,00.asp

https://search.proquest.com/pqrl/docview/227563993/28A4271EEF414743PQ/1?accountid=41759

Every few days, it seems, another "Office Killer" is turning up in the market to challenge Microsoft by offering productivity applications for free. Some are cross-platform. Many are Web-based. All offer the promise of delivering Microsoft-level functionality for nothing, or next to nothing.

To be fair, suites like Google Docs offer quick and easy word processing and some spreadsheet functionality that gives the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant a run for its money. With that in mind, the CRN Test Center wanted to provide a close look at Access 2007, the $229 Microsoft desktop database that received a major upgrade in this recent version over Access 2003 and which comes included in Office 2007. To be a true Office Killer, other suites will have to find a way to take on Access 2007.

First, reviewers looked at the competitors: Kexi is an open-source desktop database that is free to download and is cross-platform-that is, it runs in Windows XP or Vista, Mac OS X and Linux. It's available for download at www.kexi-project.org and bills itself as "Microsoft Access for Linux." The Test Center looked at it: It's not. It wouldn't install on a system with a 64-bit version of Windows Vista Ultimate and can only install on Ubuntu or other Gnome versions of desktop Linux by employing sudor administration because it is written to the K Development Environment (KDE). Reviewers did get Kexi installed and running on a 32-bit version of Windows Vista and it did offer a friendly user interface with the ability to create tables, queries, forms and reports. Kexi allows for the creation of blank databases, importation of existing databases or the creation of an address book database from a template. Other templates-for customer records, inventory and the like-were not evident. Want to create a macro for Kexi? You can, but you'll need to deploy a script that enables a program written in the Python object-oriented programming language. It's got a built-in SQLite database engine and is capable of connecting to MySQL and PostgreSQL. Overall, it's a rudimentary, lightweight desktop database, meaning you get what you pay for.

OpenOffice.Org 2.3 provides the Base desktop database. Base is built on the HSQLDB database engine, written in Java, and it provides a nifty set of wizards to create tables, forms, queries and reports. OpenOffice.org has a few advantages over Access: It's free, its license doesn't limit an enterprise as to how many seats can be rolled out to individual clients and like Kexi, it's cross-platform. However, while Base provides a number of wizards to take the end user through the creation of tables, forms, queries and reports, and while Base does provide levels of customization, there's no quick, easy mechanism to create or build macros. Base does allow for the management of macros, and the ability to organize them by programming language (python, beanshell, javascript and OpenOffice.org basic). But basic levels of programming knowledge are required to build macros in Base-a potential time sink that, depending on the enterprise, could drain value from the ROI equation very quickly.

In fact, with Base, it takes about twice the number of clicks to create a table and run a report as it does in Microsoft Access 2007-a noteworthy efficiency gap. That could give Microsoft an edge when it comes to ROI that many enterprises and workgroups are now making a priority. It's not that Base is bad software and it's not that it isn't well-organized. But it simply fails in areas where Microsoft excels, and those are areas where solution providers can make a compelling case for cost savings. Consider this: If it takes a $20-an-hour office worker 15 fewer minutes a day to tabulate data and run a report in Access 2007 than it does in Base, that efficiency means that the cost-of-acquisition of Microsoft Office easily pays for itself in just a matter of months over the cost-free software suite. And that's just with one application.

Mileage, as the saying goes, may vary. Each enterprise is like a fingerprint-no two are exactly alike. But on the whole, count on Access to offer significant efficiency in both customization and workflow, not to mention cost of deployment across a Microsoft-ready enterprise.

So where does Access 2007 soar? Its features are defined and marked clearly in the workspace, navigating between features is easy and wizards are available in every feature. It's possible to create a macro in about a minute using a macro wizard. In Access 2007, table fields can store attachments (think about PDF versions of expense receipts, for example) and for the solution provider, it's easy to deploy. Microsoft provides marketing, technical and financial support to solution providers, while OpenOffice.org or Kexi's KDE development community don't even come close to that level of support.

For example, Kexi's online documentation is expansive but much of it is clearly written by those whose primary language isn't English. For solution providers based in the U.S., that could be an issue.

While Access 2007 and the rest of Office won't work in Linux, if an enterprise has already opted to standardize on Linux for the client, it's most likely for reasons that have little to do with office (small "o") productivity, or a desktop database simply isn't a thought.

For now, Office Killers won't find Microsoft's Achilles' heel by looking at Access.

At press time for CRNtech, the K Desktop Environment was set to launch KDE 4.0, of which Kexi is a part. But while the community continues to work to upgrade and improve it as part of an overall desktop productivity solution which is free (or "libre"), it continues to trail Access by a significant distance in performance and functionality.

---

Services IQ

Deployment: Access is part of the Microsoft Office 2007 suite, and is just about effortless to install on XP or Vista-based PCs. Within minutes of installation, users can build a database.

Maintenance: Other than watching as part of a routine patch management cycle, Access requires little to no maintenance.

Service Revenue Potential: Fair

Bottom Line

Microsoft Access 2007 still maintains industry leadership in desktop databases, despite an onslaught of open source or alternative applications.

Tech Stars

5 stars

Channel Stars

5 stars

Scorecard

Features

5 stars

Quality/Reliability

5 stars

Price/Performance

5 stars

Ease of Deployment

5 stars

Ease of Use

5 stars

Profit Potential

4 stars

http://www.crn.com

Copyright 2008 CMP Media LLC. All rights reserved.

Word count: 1075

LEC

LEC

(Copyright 2008 CMP Media LLC. All rights reserved.)