Do you think Microsoft Access have a long future or short future ahead?

[SuperJediMedia]

Is this Database software going to still have a long life, you think or will something better come along to replace it? I am talking about the next 3-5 years.

[Max Norris]

Next 3 to 5 years? *shrug* 2013's supported till 2023 anyway, so even if they axe it it's not going anywhere any time soon.

 

That said, it's been around for ~22 years, I doubt it'll disappear.  It's a decent front-end tool if used for the right jobs, stupidly easy to design reports/forms/queries/etc, build web front-ends, etc, the built-in database engine itself I wouldn't use in an enterprisey situation (good for home/small projects though) but you can attach other data sources like SQL Server, Oracle, MySQL and such to it too.   A few alternatives like Libre's Base (free) or FileMaker (pricey) and the like are out there too, you got alternatives for this sort of thing.

[PGHammer]

SQL Server has been attachable to Access since 1997 (Access 97) - however, truth be told, the only life for Access is where SQL Server/MySQL or other SQL-type databases haven't already replaced it.  Unsurprisingly, the biggest replacement for Access is Microsoft SQL Server, because of the one thing Access lacks - scalability, especially up.  Where Access has thrived is because SQL has, until recently, been unable to downscale - however, due to improvements in both MySQL and SQL Server Express, SQL databases can get as small as Access databases - and at either the same price or less (less if you don't own Office, due to SQL Server Express being free).  As to SQL being difficult to learn, don't be silly;  I found out that SQL Server is, by and large, actually *easier* to learn from a standing start than Access (and especially if you are familiar with - of all things - spreadsheets, such as Excel, VisiCalc, or even - don't laugh - 1-2-3).  What has SQL seeming difficult is that SQL databases CAN get supremely large - by large, I mean supercomputer (as in Cray TITAN) large.  However, while they can grow to overlarge sizes, they don't necessarily have to start there.  But due to the sheer size they can grow to, SQL databases was looked at as the ICBM of database software - using SQL on a small scale would be like swatting a fly - with a MADM (Medium Atomic Demolition Munition - which is a man-portable backpack nuclear warhead that can take small cities - or vital infrastructure - and turn them into so much irradiated territory - who wants to hold territory that glows in the dark?); overkill, basically.

 

In fact, the biggest use for SQL databases doesn't require knowing ANY code - and doesn't require Access (or any other front end, either).  The big use for SQL these days is (you should have heard this before) network administration (via Microsoft System Center Essentials or the full-up Microsoft System Center).  At the core is one or more SQL Server databases - none of which require writing any code.  (If someone would have told me that even five years ago, I would have said they were full of it - yet it's been doable since the original System Center - SEVEN years ago.  In other words, the only person "full of it" would have been me.)

[sc302 Veteran]

I don't think that sql would be a good replacement for access. For one the front end. Sql is great but it does require a bit of knowledge to get things going. Access you can open up and start going without knowledge of much or downloading multiple packages to get going. Access has the ability to create forms (think user front end or the system center front end to the sql back end). In access I was able to create a forms ui for my wife to enter in wedding guest names, numbers, and addresses to populate the database. Access has a bit to offer that sql lacks by itself.

[DeadEndAccount]

When I first started studying IT around 15 years ago there was much that was made about Access apparently dying but here we are 15 years later. I have a feeling that just like Filemaker it will keep hanging around as a quick and dirty solution when you want to get a database setup with minimum fuss and worry particularly in a small business environment. In terms of support it'll keep hanging around but don't expect anything major like being turned into a touch based application or something.

[articuno1au]

Access will keep ticking along, but I would never use it for anything more than a simple database you could pull off in Excel O.o

 

If you are asking if it will work in 5 years, you should probably be considering using a proper tool anyway. My advice, like the above is MS SQL Express or SQLLite. Both are fantastic for slightly different things.

 

MySQL works too, but it's a pain in the ass sometimes >.>

[DeadEndAccount]

Access will keep ticking along, but I would never use it for anything more than a simple database you could pull off in Excel O.o

 

If you are asking if it will work in 5 years, you should probably be considering using a proper tool anyway. My advice, like the above is MS SQL Express or SQLLite. Both are fantastic for slightly different things.

 

MySQL works too, but it's a pain in the ass sometimes >.>

 

My impression is that with MySQL it gained ground because of its free status and well known but one of those situations where the most well known doesn't say anything positive about the quality of it as a product. Personally I prefer Postgresql, Firebirdsql and SQLite (for embedded scenarios) if I had to go for an open source solution sitting on a *NIX or *BSD. When it comes to commercial SQL offerings Microsoft does make the best in terms of price, performance and reliability - I'd also put Sybase up there as well particularly when you compare Sybase running on Solaris where it would out perform Oracle in terms of price performance in almost every test - cluster or a single image. Microsoft's own SQL runs the heart of Kiwibank (the bank I bank with) which has almost a million customers so it must be doing a pretty good job.

[articuno1au]

MySQL gained traction because it was an excellent piece of software. It was cutting edge in dozens of ways and really drove SQL technology and database engines forward.

 

Then the things that normally happen with super powered Open Source software happened. The team driving it forward had a disagreement and split along the middle. Some of the team just straight up left, some started to attempt to block the proposed change and the entire thing started to slow down and fall apart.

 

Then the closed source tools screamed past as they had focus and were very well funded. MySQL got overtaken by MSSQL, and suddenly everyone else exploded onto the scene as well.

 

All in all, it's still fantastic in certain scenarios. We still use it for some of our projects and you can tune it's performance to a fine point. MSSQL is better when you don't have the time or ability to tune MySQL, even then it's very close in terms of performance.

 

I've always hated Postgre. It's well respected in some circles though, so obviously has its benefits. It's always a fun topic to discuss though

[+Fahim S. MVC]

For it's intended purpose, it is a very good tool.  It's not meant to serve the same use-case as SQLServer or MySQL.

 

However, it is misused a lot.  I think that misuse is going to go away, but it will continue to exist for its intended purpose - there are other things that you can now misuse which are more prevalent, and now that it is understood how Access is misused.

[TPreston]

Access also has Web Apps you can quickly turn your database into a web application accessible from any device its a great feature but who knows if it will be axed in the future wasting all those development hours.

[FloatingFatMan]

Without Access, where would everyone keep their video/dvd/cd/book libraries?

 

It is, and always has been, the king of small DB's, and really isn't going anywhere.  At worse, MS may eventually replace its Jet Engine with the same SQL engine they use for the free versions of Visual Studio, but its front end isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

[Anibal P]

I highly doubt it's going anywhere anytime soon 

 

I work for a Dow top 30 company, and we use both Access and SQL Server, all depends on the project 

Also as long as it's an easy tool to use at the home and SMB level it will live on there also 

[Eric Isaacs]

Microsoft is still supporting and upgrading Microsoft Access, but their last release didn't provide much for new features related to desktop application development.  The changes Microsoft made to Access focused on adding Mobile development features.  Market share for Microsoft Access continues to decline as users move from desktop applications to mobile and tablet enabled applications and take advantage of cloud based solutions.  While this is true, I still foresee Microsoft continuing to support Microsoft Access for at least a decade if not longer, especially if they can also find a niche in the mobile and tablet world.

 

Microsoft Access has been a unique development environment for many years being that it is a true rapid application development (RAD) environment.  It has historically been a great tool to bring applications into production quickly and cheaply (when done right.)  Because it is easy to start using Access, it also tends to get a bad rap from developers that do not understand how to truly develop sound database solutions.

 

While it has always been great for rapid application development, the total cost of ownership of an Microsoft Access solution is also affected by the cost of maintenance.  Microsoft Access is not ideal when it comes to maintenance as it is difficult to find all code that may be affected by changes as it is not an object-oriented software development environment, and affected code can span VBA modules, queries, forms, reports, and external code in other Microsoft Office tools. 

 

Also of consideration, a lot of Microsoft Access development professionals have moved on to other development environments since the desktop is not the future for programming and because it's not easy to maintain your code like object-oriented solutions.  It's becoming harder and harder to find qualified Microsoft Access developers to support your software.  The labor market to support your software matters too.  It's getting more and more expensive to find Microsoft Access developers and those that are good at it are actually being paid premium rates because of their now special skills.  The labor market matters in the total cost of ownership of your software.

 

Another consideration is security.  Microsoft Access is NOT a secure development environment and protecting your data in an Access solution is very difficult to do right and even when done the best ways possibile, it's still not as secure as other options or custom code that is designed for security. 

 

For new development or as an optional RAD environment for robust applications, I would strongly suggest looking into Microsoft Dynamics CRM as a viable replacement for existing Microsoft Access application or new development that used to be ideal for Microsoft Access.  CRM is available onsite or in hosted environments at third-parties or through Microsoft Cloud Services.  The online offerings takes the burden of maintaining SQL Server and CRM off the business and provides a much more robust "backup" of your data than any Microsoft Access solution.  It also includes incredible out-of-the-box functionality allowing you to maintain client and account information online or via mobile or tablet based forms.  CRM is built to be easily customizable by properly indentifying the relationships between your data entities (like Access) but with the added benefit of having quick to build forms and reports based on your entity (table) relationships.  Security is built-in and users, teams and roles can easily be configured to limit access to information to only data that is allowed to be viewed.

 

If your Microsoft Access solution is primarily based on tracking contacts and accounts, CRM would be my first recomendation for an inexpensive solution to replace Microsoft Access-based code.  You'll get a well designed system that has been pre-tested and debugged and will work out of the box for tracking your contacts and accounts.

 

But CRM is not just for contacts and accounts.  It's actually what is referred to as an xRM development platform, where the x can be anything that has a relationship with other entities in your system.  CRM is built to be configurable and it's web and mobile functionality is built in.

 

Before you invest a lot of time or money into a new or aging Microsoft Access application, look into what you would get out of the box by using Microsoft Dynamics CRM Online solution instead.

 

-Eric Isaacs

Celedon Partners

[M_Lyons10]

For it's intended purpose, it is a very good tool.  It's not meant to serve the same use-case as SQLServer or MySQL.

 

However, it is misused a lot.  I think that misuse is going to go away, but it will continue to exist for its intended purpose - there are other things that you can now misuse which are more prevalent, and now that it is understood how Access is misused.

Boy if that isn't the truth.

 

I used to work for a company that was part of a franchise system.  The franchisor (Who just decided one day they were going to offer IT services) designed an application that was designed to be NETWORKED entirely within Access.  Ignoring the $ 150 per month price tag for that software, it was garbage (For obvious reasons)....

I've used Access for projects in the past, but any time you're networking anything, or will have multiple users in the product, you really need a more robust solution such as SQL Server.

 

To chime in on the OP's question, I agree with the other posters on this.  I don't see Access going anywhere, but what I do see (hope) is that it becomes better understood what its strengths and weaknesses are.  It has some great strengths and uses, but it also has some significant weaknesses (Because there are some things it just wasn't designed for).

[Glen]

I think MS Access will continue to have it's place somewhere between the spreadsheet (Excel) and SQL server.  It's still ideal for creating a small and portable database solution for data entry and simple reports, where the dataset is too large for spreadsheets.  I use Access for small business sales records and customer mailing lists, and for that purpose, it works great.

[+Eternal Tempest MVC]

At worst, they could fall like IBM, that doesn't mean IBM not still around.

They've evolved with the new CEO, and they have a chance to continue to be relevant in the future.

[PGHammer]

I don't think that sql would be a good replacement for access. For one the front end. Sql is great but it does require a bit of knowledge to get things going. Access you can open up and start going without knowledge of much or downloading multiple packages to get going. Access has the ability to create forms (think user front end or the system center front end to the sql back end). In access I was able to create a forms ui for my wife to enter in wedding guest names, numbers, and addresses to populate the database. Access has a bit to offer that sql lacks by itself.

Remember, Access can still be the front end to a SQL database (it has, in fact, been the case for almost two decades) - the only reason that Access has persisted as the back end as well (in business) is that there was no zero-cost alternative (I'm referring to SMBs, of course). Now there is SQL Server Express - which itself is upscalable to the full SQL Server; the REAL problem is that there is no converter between Access and SQL - either from Microsoft or a third party. That means there is the nasty chore of re-writing the database itself.

[Peter Pak]

As a heavly invested MSAccess user and with Microsoft supporting it till 2023 - it is not going anywhere.

To be honest it is the only software product that Microsoft has produced that is still current today.

Code that was written back in MSAccess 95 with DAO still works today.

It is just a pitty it has a bad wrap in the market place.

If they could have only made the .accdb client server not file server out of the box with out doing anything - it would have dominated the world......

Instead they have focused on SQL and .Net which are great products.

Then Lightswitch came,  i thought was a serious MSAccess replacment, however they have dropped the ball here too.

So back to MSAccess, the only product that continues to work consitantly year after year......

 

To Redmond - the new MSAccess 2013 really has gone in thw wrong direction with Web Forms, it really does not work. If you could get the old forms to work in the cloud, with existing code and using the .accdb then you really have a game changing product. PS: A VBA update would be nice to use both VBA and VB.Net to hook into .net code libaries would also be awesome (which you can sort of do now).

 

[binaryzero]

It'll be around for a while. It has its value. 

[Mikl1]

Is MS Access a good option for a 25 page Excel Pivot Table?    I need to make the pivot table accessible to customers and clients of a financial agency....   

[PGHammer]

As a heavly invested MSAccess user and with Microsoft supporting it till 2023 - it is not going anywhere.

To be honest it is the only software product that Microsoft has produced that is still current today.

Code that was written back in MSAccess 95 with DAO still works today.

It is just a pitty it has a bad wrap in the market place.

If they could have only made the .accdb client server not file server out of the box with out doing anything - it would have dominated the world......

Instead they have focused on SQL and .Net which are great products.

Then Lightswitch came,  i thought was a serious MSAccess replacment, however they have dropped the ball here too.

So back to MSAccess, the only product that continues to work consitantly year after year......

 

To Redmond - the new MSAccess 2013 really has gone in thw wrong direction with Web Forms, it really does not work. If you could get the old forms to work in the cloud, with existing code and using the .accdb then you really have a game changing product. PS: A VBA update would be nice to use both VBA and VB.Net to hook into .net code libaries would also be awesome (which you can sort of do now).

 

And therein lies the rub - with anything - the "heavily invested".  Once you get to that point (or even think you're at that point), you're looking for reasons to stay put - not reasons to move forward.  How much of what you use Access for can translate to any other database - including SQL Server?  Yet the migration curve keeps folks with the status quo.  Unless you have no real choice, most businesses (from SMBs to enterprises) can't be pried away from whatever software they are using with a Caterpillar D-15 - staying put is too easy.

[PGHammer]

Microsoft is still supporting and upgrading Microsoft Access, but their last release didn't provide much for new features related to desktop application development.  The changes Microsoft made to Access focused on adding Mobile development features.  Market share for Microsoft Access continues to decline as users move from desktop applications to mobile and tablet enabled applications and take advantage of cloud based solutions.  While this is true, I still foresee Microsoft continuing to support Microsoft Access for at least a decade if not longer, especially if they can also find a niche in the mobile and tablet world.

 

Microsoft Access has been a unique development environment for many years being that it is a true rapid application development (RAD) environment.  It has historically been a great tool to bring applications into production quickly and cheaply (when done right.)  Because it is easy to start using Access, it also tends to get a bad rap from developers that do not understand how to truly develop sound database solutions.

 

While it has always been great for rapid application development, the total cost of ownership of an Microsoft Access solution is also affected by the cost of maintenance.  Microsoft Access is not ideal when it comes to maintenance as it is difficult to find all code that may be affected by changes as it is not an object-oriented software development environment, and affected code can span VBA modules, queries, forms, reports, and external code in other Microsoft Office tools. 

 

Also of consideration, a lot of Microsoft Access development professionals have moved on to other development environments since the desktop is not the future for programming and because it's not easy to maintain your code like object-oriented solutions.  It's becoming harder and harder to find qualified Microsoft Access developers to support your software.  The labor market to support your software matters too.  It's getting more and more expensive to find Microsoft Access developers and those that are good at it are actually being paid premium rates because of their now special skills.  The labor market matters in the total cost of ownership of your software.

 

Another consideration is security.  Microsoft Access is NOT a secure development environment and protecting your data in an Access solution is very difficult to do right and even when done the best ways possibile, it's still not as secure as other options or custom code that is designed for security. 

 

For new development or as an optional RAD environment for robust applications, I would strongly suggest looking into Microsoft Dynamics CRM as a viable replacement for existing Microsoft Access application or new development that used to be ideal for Microsoft Access.  CRM is available onsite or in hosted environments at third-parties or through Microsoft Cloud Services.  The online offerings takes the burden of maintaining SQL Server and CRM off the business and provides a much more robust "backup" of your data than any Microsoft Access solution.  It also includes incredible out-of-the-box functionality allowing you to maintain client and account information online or via mobile or tablet based forms.  CRM is built to be easily customizable by properly indentifying the relationships between your data entities (like Access) but with the added benefit of having quick to build forms and reports based on your entity (table) relationships.  Security is built-in and users, teams and roles can easily be configured to limit access to information to only data that is allowed to be viewed.

 

If your Microsoft Access solution is primarily based on tracking contacts and accounts, CRM would be my first recomendation for an inexpensive solution to replace Microsoft Access-based code.  You'll get a well designed system that has been pre-tested and debugged and will work out of the box for tracking your contacts and accounts.

 

But CRM is not just for contacts and accounts.  It's actually what is referred to as an xRM development platform, where the x can be anything that has a relationship with other entities in your system.  CRM is built to be configurable and it's web and mobile functionality is built in.

 

Before you invest a lot of time or money into a new or aging Microsoft Access application, look into what you would get out of the box by using Microsoft Dynamics CRM Online solution instead.

 

-Eric Isaacs

Celedon Partners

And guess what Dynamics/CRM is largely built around? Dynamics/CRM - like every version of SQL Server itself going forward - has required less and less in the way of scutwork going forward as far as maintenance - for most uses nowadays, between wizards and templates, it mostly maintains itself.  (That is something that very few CRM products can do on any scale - what are most of the costs of SAP or Salesforce.com built around, for example?)

[devHead]

Access will keep ticking along, but I would never use it for anything more than a simple database you could pull off in Excel O.o

Excel doesn't even come close to the functionality and database management functionality of Access.  Unfortunately there are a large number of folks who think that Excel and Access are similar - maybe because the tables in an Access database look similar to an Excel spreadsheet.  In reality, they have absolutely no similarities beyond that grid-like looking structure.  Access has the ability to create relationships between different tables - query creation using a form of SQL language, and of course the ability to design forms for viewing data from multiple tables and/or queries.  Excel is just a spreadsheet application.  I can't believe how many people think they have anything in common.