Access 2003 - Will SP2 fix the f%^£ng Subform Edit In Place Obstruction

I know, I know ... beta NDA's. After Access 95 I refused to sign anything,
sometimes the price to be "on the inside" is just too high.

It really is a pain, Access 2006 looks even worse. (sigh)

It would be great to have a de-install all wizards option, and a developer's
switch to chuck out all the "useability".

I noticed someone asking about Access Professional as opposed to Access
Standard and at first I thought they are just confused with the edtions of
Office. Then I thought wouldn't it be good to actually have two editions of
Access (really just a series of predetermined options set in the Registry)
one edition containing all the silly stuff they have been adding since
Access 2/97 the other streamlined for developers. The next version of Access
is going to be a horrible explosion of Form and Report wizards, I even hear
that you will be able to design a form/report and the tables will be created
for you (Lotus Approach did something like this 10 years ago, better blatant
than never), great for users creating a typical spreadsheet in a database
app, unprintable for serious developers. This is what the lookup field and
the subdatasheet have been leading up to, sorry.


--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison

So quit your bitching and go back to Approach if it is so good.
You obviously don't understand why Access is what it is.
My first thought was to explain it to you, but then I decided it would be a
waste of time. It would only **** you off and frustrate me.

"Craig Alexander Morrison" wrote:

I know, I know ... beta NDA's. After Access 95 I refused to sign anything,
sometimes the price to be "on the inside" is just too high.

It really is a pain, Access 2006 looks even worse. (sigh)

It would be great to have a de-install all wizards option, and a developer's
switch to chuck out all the "useability".

I noticed someone asking about Access Professional as opposed to Access
Standard and at first I thought they are just confused with the edtions of
Office. Then I thought wouldn't it be good to actually have two editions of
Access (really just a series of predetermined options set in the Registry)
one edition containing all the silly stuff they have been adding since
Access 2/97 the other streamlined for developers. The next version of Access
is going to be a horrible explosion of Form and Report wizards, I even hear
that you will be able to design a form/report and the tables will be created
for you (Lotus Approach did something like this 10 years ago, better blatant
than never), great for users creating a typical spreadsheet in a database
app, unprintable for serious developers. This is what the lookup field and
the subdatasheet have been leading up to, sorry.


--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison

We have used Access since the beginning and Approach is crap.

You explain Access to me. (vbg) Try reading the message that was posted.

--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison
"Klatuu" wrote in message
...
So quit your bitching and go back to Approach if it is so good.
You obviously don't understand why Access is what it is.
My first thought was to explain it to you, but then I decided it would be
a
waste of time. It would only **** you off and frustrate me.

I did read you message. It is nothing more than a bunch of whinning and
bitching about Access. Yes, I think I could explain Access to you. Based on
you post, you don't know very much.
If you are using a pre-release version of any product, you expect issues.
Why do you think the give away beta versions? Out of the kindness of their
hearts?
The features you are complaining about are there for novices.
After you have been in IT for 30 years, come back and tell me how it works.

"Craig Alexander Morrison" wrote:

We have used Access since the beginning and Approach is crap.

You explain Access to me. (vbg) Try reading the message that was posted.

--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison
"Klatuu" wrote in message
...
So quit your bitching and go back to Approach if it is so good.
You obviously don't understand why Access is what it is.
My first thought was to explain it to you, but then I decided it would be
a
waste of time. It would only **** you off and frustrate me.

I can see that you may not know me, I have been developing in Access since
1992 and regard Access 2 and Access 97 as the Gold standards.

Access 95/2000 were very sad and Access 2002/2003 are only now reaching the
levels of reliability that Access 97 had.

I take it you were not around in the early 90's on the CompuServe Forum
MSACCESS, but you remind me of someone from then. (vbg)

--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison
"Klatuu" wrote in message
...
So quit your bitching and go back to Approach if it is so good.
You obviously don't understand why Access is what it is.
My first thought was to explain it to you, but then I decided it would be
a
waste of time. It would only **** you off and frustrate me.

The features impact on the reliablity of the core product.

Many developers are concerned that frippery is added when core functions
require attention.

I have no problem with the usability being added for end users I just don't
want them to get in my way.

I am disappointed that you feel the need to sling insults, not a very grown
up response.

Explain Access then...Pretend I know nothing, if it makes you happy.

--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison
"Klatuu" wrote in message
...
I did read you message. It is nothing more than a bunch of whinning and
bitching about Access. Yes, I think I could explain Access to you. Based
on
you post, you don't know very much.
If you are using a pre-release version of any product, you expect issues.
Why do you think the give away beta versions? Out of the kindness of
their
hearts?
The features you are complaining about are there for novices.
After you have been in IT for 30 years, come back and tell me how it
works.

"Craig Alexander Morrison" wrote:

We have used Access since the beginning and Approach is crap.

You explain Access to me. (vbg) Try reading the message that was posted.

--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison
"Klatuu" wrote in message
...
So quit your bitching and go back to Approach if it is so good.
You obviously don't understand why Access is what it is.
My first thought was to explain it to you, but then I decided it would
be
a
waste of time. It would only **** you off and frustrate me.

No, wasn't me. Until 99 I was working in FoxPro. Access got good when
Microsoft bought FoxPro so they would have a decent database engine. I
switched to Access at a client's request and found I like it pretty well and
it was an easy transition because I alread has about 15 years in various
versions of Basic.

On one point we do agree. There are a lot of features in Access, as well as
other products, that, for we professionals, have no value. That does not
mean we have to use them.

Since the beginning of computers, software companies have used features and
functions to sell software. (You just have to pay us money to get the new
MaybeCouldBeSortOf features! You don't want to be out of date do you? Or Our
product has BilliousNonsenseExtended, but our competitor doesn't, you should
buy our product!) As an historical insight, COBOL was originally written so
that users could write their own applications without having to deal with all
those goofy Assembler programmers. Yeah, right.

The other issue is that Dbase, Approach, and Access were all originally
designed as desktop database systems to be used by the business user. They
put in a lot of the functionality to guide people who are not truely computer
literate through building something they could use.
Your comment about "spreadsheet" is dead on. How many times have users
asked you to create an Access Application that worked like the Excel
spreadsheet they have been using? Don't know about you, but it drives me nuts.

I certainly understand your point of view, but what is the point of
complaining about the product? There are features of Access I hate and some
that are really good. My least favorite is how Access handles form sizing.
I wish there was a way to turn that feature off and let me size and position
my forms the way I want to. I also think that Microsoft really screwed up
the Rushmore technology that the FoxPro database engine was built on. I
think it had some of the best indexing capabilities ever.
But, Access is a pretty good product, and by far the most prominent for
smaller applications. So I use the parts I like and ignore the rest. I have
all my wizards turned off so I can get on with getting the job done.

At least I don't have to write my code on a "coding tablet" and get it
keypunched any more

"Craig Alexander Morrison" wrote:

I can see that you may not know me, I have been developing in Access since
1992 and regard Access 2 and Access 97 as the Gold standards.

Access 95/2000 were very sad and Access 2002/2003 are only now reaching the
levels of reliability that Access 97 had.

I take it you were not around in the early 90's on the CompuServe Forum
MSACCESS, but you remind me of someone from then. (vbg)

--
Slainte

Craig Alexander Morrison
"Klatuu" wrote in message
...
So quit your bitching and go back to Approach if it is so good.
You obviously don't understand why Access is what it is.
My first thought was to explain it to you, but then I decided it would be
a
waste of time. It would only **** you off and frustrate me.

I am not sure what you mean by Edit in place?

Simply right click, and select sub form in new window..and you are editing
the sub form separately?

To make this work, make sure the sub-form is NOT select, then simply place
your mouse cursor over the screen, and right click. You then select sub form
in new window. This feature gives you best of both worlds.

I also came from a97, and I did NOT like the sub-form editing in place.
however, you can simply right click, and away you go. Further, I now find
that often (as much as 30-40% of time, some sub-forms I DO WANT to edit in
place...it turns out this feature is a BIG time saver for many forms).

Anyway...just use the right click....and you should be fine...

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal

You know even when I read these types of threads that have no relevence to
people trying to get assistance I get NEW information...

Hence,
Simply right click, and select sub form in new window..

I got used to editing the subform and/or subreport in place and only found
it annoying when the form was too small to be edited in place and NOW I
don't have to close the main form and go open the subform and/or subreport.
a BIG BIG thanks to Albert!

As for the other stuff, no comment...


"Albert D.Kallal" wrote in message
...
I am not sure what you mean by Edit in place?

Simply right click, and select sub form in new window..and you are editing
the sub form separately?

To make this work, make sure the sub-form is NOT select, then simply place
your mouse cursor over the screen, and right click. You then select sub
form in new window. This feature gives you best of both worlds.

I also came from a97, and I did NOT like the sub-form editing in place.
however, you can simply right click, and away you go. Further, I now find
that often (as much as 30-40% of time, some sub-forms I DO WANT to edit in
place...it turns out this feature is a BIG time saver for many forms).

Anyway...just use the right click....and you should be fine...

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal

NOW I don't have to close the main form and go open the subform and/or
subreport. a BIG BIG thanks to Albert!


You are most welcome. I suspect that Craig also is not aware of this
feature.

As I mentioned, MOST of the time I do want the form separate. However, I
very MUCH like the in-place editing WHEN I need it (it is not most of the
time..but I find for mature applications, and moving a few fields around to
aline them with the main form, then in-placed editing is very nice).

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal