I've been banned from UtterAccess

because I used Jet replication extensively..

and it didn't work reliably enough.. so I built my own.

-Aaron



On Mar 25, 7:20*pm, "Tony Toews [MVP]" wrote:
" wrote:
ACCESS REPLICATION WORKS FOR ME BECAUSE I USE ADP.
I also have database mirroring and database snapshots.

Do you?

Yet another answer that doesn't answer any questions.

ACCESSS REPLICATION WAS REMOVED FROM ACCESS 2007 (FORMAT) BECAUSE IT
IS NOT RELIABLE ENOUGH.

I'm curious. *How do you know this?

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
* *Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
* *Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems athttp://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
* *Tony's Microsoft Access Blog -http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

too hard? ROFL

is it too hard for SQL Server professionals?

no-- they're dumbing down Access!!!
Just like they have been for the past decade.






On Mar 26, 7:59*pm, "David W. Fenton"
wrote:
" wrote
:

ACCESSS REPLICATION WAS REMOVED FROM ACCESS 2007 (FORMAT) BECAUSE
IT IS NOT RELIABLE ENOUGH.

Actually, they ommitted it from the ACCDB format (along with ULS)
because it's too hard for casual users. A2007 is unquestionably and
end-user-oriented release of Access, and for security and
replication, they made the decision that these were back-end issues,
and if you need those features, you use a different back end.

I disagree vehemently with that decision, but it was made for reason
that have nothing at all to do with reliability. Jet replication is
just as reliable as all other operations with a Jet back end.

--
David W. Fenton * * * * * * * * *http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com * *http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

It's a pity these groups are not moderated to ban people who post offensive
personal remarks.

Go ahead, Aaron. Say something like:
"Other people say mean things to me"
or
"Somebody else started it"

wrote in message
...
No Tony-- y0u are absolute rubbish

Just because you attempted ONE upsizing and failed-- that doesn't mean
that it's not the right solution for everyone else.

It's called egocentrism..
but you're canadian so it's spelled
F_U_C_K_Y_O_U_R_M_I_S_I_N_F_O_R_M_A_T_I_O_N





On Mar 25, 11:56 am, "Tony Toews [MVP]"
wrote:
" wrote:
MDB IS NOT A NATIVE FORMAT OF ACCESS 2007.

MDB and ACCDB are both native formats of A2007.

ADP IS THE MOST POPULAR FORMAT IN ACCESS 2000, 2002 and 2003. AND
2007.

Absolute rubbish.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems
athttp://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog -http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

it's a pity that your arguments aren't strong enough to win me over

Of course, Im a certified DBA and I've built my career-- working on
the worlds most popular database...
So maybe you'll have to convince Microsoft and the whole wide world
first

And meanwhile, you're stuck in the 1st grade of the database world



On Mar 31, 7:39*am, "BruceM" bamoob_at_yawhodotcalm.not wrote:
It's a pity these groups are not moderated to ban people who post offensive
personal remarks.

Go ahead, Aaron. *Say something like:
"Other people say mean things to me"
or
"Somebody else started it"

wrote in message

...
No Tony-- y0u are absolute rubbish

Just because you attempted ONE upsizing and failed-- that doesn't mean
that it's not the right solution for everyone else.

It's called egocentrism..
but you're canadian so it's spelled
F_U_C_K_Y_O_U_R_M_I_S_I_N_F_O_R_M_A_T_I_O_N

On Mar 25, 11:56 am, "Tony Toews [MVP]"
wrote:

" wrote:
MDB IS NOT A NATIVE FORMAT OF ACCESS 2007.

MDB and ACCDB are both native formats of A2007.

ADP IS THE MOST POPULAR FORMAT IN ACCESS 2000, 2002 and 2003. AND
2007.

Absolute rubbish.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems
athttp://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog -http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

"BruceM" bamoob_at_yawhodotcalm.not wrote in
:

It's a pity these groups are not moderated to ban people who post
offensive personal remarks.

I completely disagree. The answer to "offensive" speech is MORE
SPEECH. When there's free discourse, it often becomes clear that
what one person finds offensive is something another finds
admirable.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

well maybe you should write a letter to microsoft trying to convince
them that their MVPs don't need to try to rid the internet of swearing
well maybe you should write a letter to microsoft trying to convince
them that their MVPs don't need to try to rid the internet of swearing
well maybe you should write a letter to microsoft trying to convince
them that their MVPs don't need to try to rid the internet of swearing





On Mar 31, 10:20*am, "David W. Fenton"
wrote:
"BruceM" bamoob_at_yawhodotcalm.not wrote :

It's a pity these groups are not moderated to ban people who post
offensive personal remarks.

I completely disagree. The answer to "offensive" speech is MORE
SPEECH. When there's free discourse, it often becomes clear that
what one person finds offensive is something another finds
admirable.

--
David W. Fenton * * * * * * * * *http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com * *http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

You're welcome to disagree with my view that f-bombs and other forms of
personal attack do not promote discourse. Aaron wrote:

"It's called egocentrism..
but you're canadian so it's spelled ..."
followed by a munged curse.

Try as I may, I see nothing admirable in that species of attack.

"David W. Fenton" wrote in message
36.91...
"BruceM" bamoob_at_yawhodotcalm.not wrote in
:

It's a pity these groups are not moderated to ban people who post
offensive personal remarks.

I completely disagree. The answer to "offensive" speech is MORE
SPEECH. When there's free discourse, it often becomes clear that
what one person finds offensive is something another finds
admirable.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

well I'm just glad that you're not in charge of Usenet / Google

There's nothing wrong with f-bombs
so sorry that you go to church.. that doesn't mean that your premise--
that people should be polite-- is soooo ingrained in your head.. that
you insist on jamming _YOUR_ morals into _MY_ life.

it doesn't mean that you need to insist that
_EVERYONE_WHO_USES_ACCESS_USE_YOUR_FLAVOR_OF_ACCES S_

it doesn't mean that you need to insist that
_EVERYONE_WHO_USES_ACCESS_USE_YOUR_FLAVOR_OF_ACCES S_

it doesn't mean that you need to insist that
_EVERYONE_WHO_USES_ACCESS_USE_YOUR_FLAVOR_OF_ACCES S_




BruceM wrote:
You're welcome to disagree with my view that f-bombs and other forms of
personal attack do not promote discourse. Aaron wrote:

"It's called egocentrism..
but you're canadian so it's spelled ..."
followed by a munged curse.

Try as I may, I see nothing admirable in that species of attack.

"David W. Fenton" wrote in message
36.91...
"BruceM" bamoob_at_yawhodotcalm.not wrote in
:

It's a pity these groups are not moderated to ban people who post
offensive personal remarks.

I completely disagree. The answer to "offensive" speech is MORE
SPEECH. When there's free discourse, it often becomes clear that
what one person finds offensive is something another finds
admirable.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

And I'm glad you're not in charge of anything at all. By the way,
congratulations on your continued demonstration of copy and paste
proficiency.

I do not insist what you claim I do. There is a place for SQL server. You,
not I, are the monomaniacal person here.

"a a r o n . k e m p f @ g m a i l . c o m" wrote in
message
...
well I'm just glad that you're not in charge of Usenet / Google

There's nothing wrong with f-bombs
so sorry that you go to church.. that doesn't mean that your premise--
that people should be polite-- is soooo ingrained in your head.. that
you insist on jamming _YOUR_ morals into _MY_ life.

it doesn't mean that you need to insist that
_EVERYONE_WHO_USES_ACCESS_USE_YOUR_FLAVOR_OF_ACCES S_

it doesn't mean that you need to insist that
_EVERYONE_WHO_USES_ACCESS_USE_YOUR_FLAVOR_OF_ACCES S_

it doesn't mean that you need to insist that
_EVERYONE_WHO_USES_ACCESS_USE_YOUR_FLAVOR_OF_ACCES S_




BruceM wrote:
You're welcome to disagree with my view that f-bombs and other forms of
personal attack do not promote discourse. Aaron wrote:

"It's called egocentrism..
but you're canadian so it's spelled ..."
followed by a munged curse.

Try as I may, I see nothing admirable in that species of attack.

"David W. Fenton" wrote in message
36.91...
"BruceM" bamoob_at_yawhodotcalm.not wrote in
:

It's a pity these groups are not moderated to ban people who post
offensive personal remarks.

I completely disagree. The answer to "offensive" speech is MORE
SPEECH. When there's free discourse, it often becomes clear that
what one person finds offensive is something another finds
admirable.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

"BruceM" bamoob_at_yawhodotcalm.not wrote in
:

You're welcome to disagree with my view that f-bombs and other
forms of personal attack do not promote discourse.

The problem is that many people seem unable to distinguish the use
of strong language to criticize something someone posted, versus
strong language used to criticize and individual.

Aaron is certainly not one of the hard cases -- he uses ad hominem
attacks, while pretending that he's criticizing the advice in a
post.

The problem is that someone would be making the decision to ban and
that means that in a certain number of cases, mistakes will happen.
It's the equivalent of a Usenet death penalty (though rather easily
circumvented), and like the real-life death penalty, I think it's
better to put up with the annoyances of an Aaron Kempf (using a
killfile judiciously to avoid seeing his crap) than it is to start
hunting down offenders and banning them.

Spirited discourse is better than civil discourse, in my opinion.
The problem, of course, is that spirits often get out of hand and
become uncivil. I say that goes with the territory of all human
discourse and is a feature, not a defect.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/