# Microsoft Access **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 19, 2012, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/microsoft-access/619238 "2012-04-19T03:20:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BTEzra04](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9f8e36/32.png) [@BTEzra04](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BTEzra04)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2012, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/microsoft-access/619238/41 "2012-04-21T23:11:14Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > When you say “SQL Developer”, are you referring to the free Oracle front end? Yup, that’s the one. I’ve only just started using it for a project for the class. Our professor recommends both SQL Developer and SQL Plus, which I haven’t examined just yet. He has a few choice words about Access, though, from what I’ve heard. It’s interesting hearing all the divisions over “real RDMS’s” stuff in the department 😛 > [@DMC](#): > > If you find this stuff fun (I do), I’d recommend you learn both Oracle and SQL Server. Sounds like you have Oracle covered, but you can get a fully functioning Enterprise Edition of SQL Server 2012 (this is the one with all of the bells and whistles, including a rather large BI stack), for [about $60](http://www.amazon.com/SQL-Server-Developer-Edition-2012/dp/B007RFXQAM/ref=sr_1_2?s=software&ie=UTF8&qid=1334528501&sr=1-2). It’s called the Developer Edition, but other than the fact that you can’t legally use it for production work, it’s fully functional. In other words, you can build and test things all day long, you just can’t use it as a backend for your finished commercial product. > > Oracle has many great things going for it, but SQL Server does as well, and it comes with a lot more playthings in the core package. Knowing both will serve you well in your future, although you’re unlikely to be a true expert in both, as there’s just too much to keep up with. If you get really good, give me a shout. I might be hiring. 🙂 Sounds interesting; I love fiddling with whatever tech stuff I can get my hands on (and almost have tech-ADD at times). Thanks for the heads up, and I’ll definitely look into it! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![kushiel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbce88/32.png) [@kushiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kushiel)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2012, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/microsoft-access/619238/42 "2012-04-22T18:31:36Z")
As a web person, Access is like an entire circle of Hell. Sure, Access might work well for your desktop use, but the second you want the data online, it’s like stabbing yourself in the eyes with a fork. Especially since I work with low budget clients who turned to Access in the first place because they couldn’t afford a professional database solution. Also, curse anyone who actually uses Access as their website database format. Because a CMS built on mdb is like stabbing my entire face with a fork. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2012, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/microsoft-access/619238/43 "2012-04-23T04:40:28Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > The key word here is “should” and even that isn’t true in every situation. My concern was that it sounded a bit like his database system automatically linked them solely because they had the same name (might not have been true, as it was a bit vague), which is a pretty scary thought. . . . My fault for not being clear… The link occurs if the names are the same and both fields are indicated to be key fields (and I think there’s another step I’m forgetting…) It isn’t as automatic as I may have suggested. (Oh, right, also both fields have to be unique fields… This is why serial numbers are used instead of common names, as there might easily be two guys named Mike Jones.) (Also, of course, the two tables have to be in the same database… It doesn’t automatically link across DBs.) Anyway, I could make that old system dance on the head of a pin – made my living at it for several years! But Access just stymies me in everything I’ve ever tried to do. (Well, okay, I can create tables. That itself is kinda useful!) ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2012, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/microsoft-access/619238/44 "2012-04-23T04:47:07Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > I’ve tried repeatedly to teach myself Access and even now taken a couple of pro-taught classes on it, and I still run back to my beloved Excel. Even if it probably takes me twice as long to figure out how to do what I want to do in Excel, I know what I’m doing all along the way. This! This is what prompted me to Pit Access in the first place. I can work with Excel! It isn’t a DB, and thus there are some DB-like things I can’t do in it. But since I can’t do them in Access either, I might as well stick with Excel, where I can actually do Spreadsheet-like things, anyway! > [@kushiel](#): > > As a web person, Access is like an entire circle of Hell. Sure, Access might work well for your desktop use . . . Ouch! This is something I’ve never tried to do, but I’m glad to be warned away from ever trying it. Thanks! (Alas, my opinion is that Access doesn’t work well for desktop use either! It may not have been a full circle of Hell, but it qualified as one of the Malebolge…) (P.S. Just learned, to my intense amusement, that “Malbolge” is the name of a computer language!) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/microsoft-access/619238.md?page=2)