Well, nobody responded to my earlier particular question about MS-Access (TM). So I'll get more general.

What database software is anybody using? Russ I know uses FileMaker on the Mac.

MS-Access (PC)?
MS-FoxPro (PC)?
Paradox (PC)?
(Is it still sold/supported?)
dBASExx (PC)?
(The old standby from the DOS days,
powerful programming language)
Others?

Reply to post by Scott Cullen, on September 04, 1999 at 07:12:48:

Here's my comments, biased though they may be. I have worked extensively with FileMaker, some limited use of Access and a few other packaged databases (ClarisWorks, etc.)

Fox Pro and Paradox are high end professional database suites, usually requiring extensive training and experience. Read that as a very steep and long learning curve. They handle big number crunching tasks well, and are versatile if you know how to work them. They are not for the faint of heart, as I understand.

dBase XX is an old DOS holdover, and is now mutated (Fox Pro?)

MS Access- as I said, I have only limited experience with it, and I don't recall it very fondly. I had a lot of trouble trying to figure out some of the basic stuff. But that was a few years ago.

FileMaker, now from FileMaker, Inc., is a cross platform application. It is available for both Mac and PC, and while you need the appropriate application for your platform, any file created can be opened by either platform. I found it easy to use and learn. Like most software of this type, the more you study it, the more you can make it perform. But if you want something easy to start with and at the same time something that has full relational database capabilities, this is it. (Scott, I was credited by a few top developers with discovering a way to eliminate the join files in many-to-many relationships in FileMaker)

In short, don't write off FileMaker as a simplistic database application. It is in use worldwide by major corporations for many purposes, and has tremendous capabilities. Unless you need really complex and absolute control, you won't go wrong with this. And it is cross platform- the Mac is back!

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on September 04, 1999 at 07:12:48:

Thanks for the input.

I have a lot of experience with database design programming, it's just that it was all in the DOS dBASE XX world.

(As a little background dBASE was one of the original micro database products and emerged as THE standard in the early 80's. Ashton-Tate, the commercial developer who took it over from the original guys, had a "you pay us big run-time fees" policy vis-a-vis application developers and it ran in an interpreter -- read slow and code vulnerable to tamper-tinker -- mode. The market responeded with a number of dBASE language super sets - more functionality and power - that would run compiled -- read fast and non-tamperable code -- applications with no run time fees. Fox-Base and Clipper were the most successful. As the world migrated to Windows platforms with GUIs and Object Oriented Programming (OOP), they slipped into the background as the province of applications developers. Interestingly, Microsoft wanted to include a database in it's "Office" suite and bought Fox-Base as a base. They turned it into an OOP GUI and Access emerged. Fox-Pro was retained as a compatible high end development platform. From what I've been able to gather Clipper remains marketed as having significant advantages in speed and data control as a pure DOS product without the clunky (are you there BW?) Windows over-patch. Visual Clipper has been engineered to retain those advantages but be approachable in the GUI. Visual Fox-Pro may have the same advantages and functionality by Microsoft soft pedals the marketing because it would seem to undercut Access which is the high volume money maker.)

So back to today, I find myself in need of database functionality again and I'm in a windows environment. Access is in the suite I've got so I've been wading in. The GUI seems friendly at first but it's a very big application and it's very quirky. The documentation is so-so and the help files don't cover everything. There are some very basic things (at least from all that dBASE experience) that don't appear to be available or are very hard to find because they are not documented.

So I'm open to better alternatives. Could be File-Maker. Could be Clipper or Fox-Pro, especially if they remain rooted in the dBASE command set which remains somewhat rooted in my brain.

Does your MAC based File-Maker have the ability to import/convert an Access Database. i.e. .MDB file?

Reply to post by Scott Cullen, on September 04, 1999 at 07:12:48:

Hi there Scott!

I am at present using MS Access 97. The good thing about Access is the link capability it has (I run it in conjunction with Mapinfo 5.5. I hope to have my system worked int a marketable product within the next couple of months. At present I am the Arb officer for Wrexham County Borough Council and I use the system to monitor and administer the works within the 50,000 hectares under my control.
The system can track finances down to the last penny and where it was spent; the database for the tree inventory is directly linked to Mapinfo and can record/store up to 35 fields for a single/group of trees. Searches can be performed on any number of fields, allowing for the user to create the exact query required. The system has had about 1000 hours of development so far and I am on to rewrite number 7.
Mickeysoft Acces is a very nice tool to use, but you really need to start with the very basics in your table structure otherwise nothing will make sense later on. Get your tables sorted first and the underlying queries will be much easier to write later on.

Watch this space for the URL for the web page for my system, i hope to have it up and running in about a weeks time.

Cheers Eirion!

Reply to post by Scott, on September 05, 1999 at 23:06:08:

FILEMAKER offers a demo version, I believe, if you want to check it out. The FileMaker 4.0 footprint is about 2.8 Meg on my disk, plus the various support files. Current retail is $200, but you can often get a rebate or competitive upgrade for about $150.

Import/export handles tab- and comma-separated text, SYLK, DIF, WKS, BASIC, DBF, and Excel, along with a few other (ClarisWorks, Edition, HTML, etc). I think (not sure) you would have to export the data from Access into n importable format, then import that into FM.

Reply to post by Eirion Lewis, on September 04, 1999 at 07:12:48:

Thanks for the input. Designing table structure and relationships is something I'm comfortable with... I had designed a tree care system in dBASE years back with about 10,000 lines of code this is all pre-GUI and auto coding).

The problems I've had with the MS-Access documentation have been with simple tools like setting a form to replicate field values from the preceding record (needs a macro or event proceduere with nether that need nore the appropriate statements documented). Or wading through umpteen levels of help screens to learn that the report control cannot have the same name as a referenced field control in a calculated text box... after hours of compiler error messages pointing me in the wrong direction.

This afternoon's revelation is that the entire OOP structure is stored as one .mdb file, i.e. very large. All tables, indeces, forms, reports, queries in one big file. That seems to make it a little awkward to back up one table's data onto a floppy for instance, or e-mail one table or one report to someone. Am I missing something?

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on September 06, 1999 at 08:30:00:

For what it is worth -- I have had great luck with FileMaker Pro on a PC platform. I find it easy to learn, quick to use, and incredibly powerful and versatile. It also picks up other format files very well. Access has given me nothing but trouble, though if you are working with other people who have only MS Office, it may be worth learning it for that reason. We are currently working with it, for instance, because we want to be able to make our products easily useable in the municipal arena, where MS Office rules.

Reply to post by Scott, on September 06, 1999 at 08:42:15:

I think you're missing FileMaker!

Reply to post by Jerry Bond, on September 06, 1999 at 13:34:28:

Jerry, the way I decided to overcome the MS Office problem is to simply bind my files into runtime solutions, like I did with the Tree Tech Solutions CD. To do this, you have to buy the Developer's Kit, about $400. Build your files, then run them through the binder and they are linked to a dedicated version of the FileMaker engine. You still use all the controls you would normally build into your files, with passwords, access control, etc. The Kit contains the binders for both Mac and PC platforms, and no royalty fees. Doing it this way makes the files a bit larger to distribute (adds about 1.4M for the engine and supporting PC files), but makes it very versatile.

Reply to post by Eirion Lewis, on September 04, 1999 at 07:12:48:

Eirion, are you using a field data collection device such as a palmtop or handheld computer or are you collecting on paper and transcribing back in the office? Curious about the ability of various devices to take those carefully designed entry forms into the field. Memory req's, battery run times, etc.?

Reply to post by Russ Carlson, on September 06, 1999 at 15:30:45:

I thought that in DOS there's a good and nice output during
the proseccig and then i have already try it but then i fondout
that this is good and a sourciable output so i think
you could do sooo....