Prev: Access 2010 x64 problem.
Next: converting to access2003 from access97
From: Salad on 26 Jul 2010 14:07
Ignorance is bliss. I mentioned on a forum I had seen Albert's app and
Channel 9s demos. But did anyone have an published to the web app that
I could experience in real life instead of a a play/start button on Youtube.

When I heard the phrase "publish to the web", I mistakenly thought I
could provide a link to the database to users and they could come in to
the site, run reports, etc.

Then I learned that that user needs to be a user in the Sharepoint
server. It made sense. Initially I figured a user was something like
"owner", "developer". and "user". And you paid for some disk space on a
hosting site. And the app determined what records to display or what
forms and reports a user had based on a key they'd enter. Like in the
login form.

From what I understand now its one user, one access. So if you had a
100 customers or vendors, and you wanted to share your database
application with them you'd need 100 user licenses. And the cost at a
hosting site might run $7-8 dollars per user/per month. The cost would
run about $8,400 to $9,600 a year. And that would not include any
company staff access to the app or the monthly cost of hosting.

Now I understand why nobody has posted a link to their sample app. It'd
be cost prohibitive. There was an app on Channel 9 an MS employee did
for Valentines Day where people listed their dream Valentine Day. Kind
of like a social network database. Another was an Ebay like
application. The cost for something like that has to be HUGE!

Perhaps those types of costs are typical. I don't know what people
charge for Cloud computing. What a program like Saleforce charges. Is
it more or less expensive?

If the prices are typical, how does one present to the boss the benefits
of paying that cash? For example, a vendor might come in once a week or
once a month, or maybe daily. For a few minutes then log off. Is that
worth the monthly nick? Or is this simply a good benefit for someone
that does data entry all day remotely? They could do the work at home
and the company doesn't have to spend a lot of money on computer equipment.

Surely there's some justification...somewhere.
From: Albert D. Kallal on 26 Jul 2010 16:43
"Salad" <salad(a)oilandvinegar.com> wrote in message
news:Yf2dnSbQfalmU9DRnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com...
> Ignorance is bliss.

Golly, I am in a good mood, so I shall not comment on the above!

>
> When I heard the phrase "publish to the web", I mistakenly thought I could
> provide a link to the database to users and they could come in to the
> site, run reports, etc.

Yes, the above is in fact quite correct. On the other hand, I don't think
you taken the time to realize what is involved in a web based application.

Can you find me an example of a database online and don't have to login that
was written in asp.net for example? (and, asp.net been out for years!).

Few if any business wants a system WIDE OPEN to the public without some kind
of sign up or logon process. In fact, I not found any business that is
looking to do this with their Access applications either.

>
> Then I learned that that user needs to be a user in the Sharepoint server.

Not true. You can allow and use anonymous users, but the use of that is very
limited. And, there is some licensing issues in terms of cost when you do it
this way.

You have to step back and think about the dance of the systems you need
here. What database server are you going to adopt to store your data? What
security for that database server are now going to going to use? So you mean
you throw up a web form, but the database server is going to be 100% open to
the public? Everyone can now take away your data? We see on a daily basis
all of these data thefts that are occurring on the Internet because simply
too many people not given this issue a thought.

If you don't have a secure mechanism that the database server recognizes,
how are you going to prevent each user from not seeing data you don't want
them to see? And in fact what about general web pages that you want some
users to view, and others to not view? You think you going to write code and
security into every web page you build? A good portion of those web pages
are not going to be access forms. You REALLY need to adopt some overall
secure model for your web systems, regardless of what your goal is here.

You might have 10 different applications that you're running on that system.
How are those 10 different applications going to know what security and what
person and who is accessing that information? You really do need some type
of mechanism for creating a user that all applications can adhere to. When
you start looking at SharePoint, there is a absolute truckload of other
services and things that you'll need (and want) to utilize.

For example what system do you think access uses on sharepoint for rendering
access reports? (answer: it uses SQL server reporting services). You don't
think they built a web based reporting system just for access did you?
Exactly what kind of software budgets and how big of a team do you think
they have here? However, just like a typical access appliation might use
Word or Outlook, the web is the SAME...you need other systems.

As for having to adopt sharepoint? Yes, this is a big issue. However, it not
so much different then if you write for the oracle database server, you're
certainly not gonna be able to take your application and publish it to a
site that runs that Oracle database on that server are you? And if you're
hosting provider doesn't have oracle databases, what you're writing is not
going to work is it?

And if you write your application to specifications use mySQL, that
application will not work with SQL or Oracle will it?

So the idea of a one click to publish to some system, certainly means that
you're going to have to adopt a web server with a FIXED set of standards. I
mean if you use one vendors reporting system to render and build reports,
obviously if your hosting provider does not support that particular report
writer, then your applications not gonna work is it?

You can write to the LAMP standard (linux, Apache, MySql, PHP). Of course if
you write to that standard, and your hosting provider doesn't support the
systems in LAMP, then you never be able to publish to that site? And, again,
what report writing system are you going to use here? And are you going to
be able to convince the hosting provider, or the company you doing work for
to adopt and install and set up and maintain and support that report writer?
(gee, this is starting to get a little bit complicated, isn't it?).

If you decide to adopt asp.net, then your web server (or your customers
current hosting) better be running those .net technologies. If you write to
oracle standards, then again, you need those exact systems and support on
that web server.

So what happens if they already have a website right now? And you now need
to interact with your access application? So, you suggest ANOTHER hosting
provider and now what about all of their current logons and current users
and current customer Service Systems that they have on their existing web
server?

So, now all the customers have to sign up again to use another application
with another set of users and passwords. And, who is gonna manage all the
resetting and management of all these passwords? Great, we sold a web site,
but now we spending all day resetting customers passwords, and looking up
forgotten user names. (how on earth is this kind of proposal going to save
them money?).

IN ALL OF THE ABOVE cases if just one of the technologies from the web
server from using Apache in place of IIS web server means your applications
not going to work. This is not a whole lot different then writing your
software for Foxpro, and then assuming it's going to run under ms access.

And, you better be able to tie the reporting system, the database system,
email, documents, pictures...everything into ONE security model.

So in the case of having to adopt sharepoint, there's some really great
up-sides that solves a HUGE list of issues and problems.
And, yes there also no question that the cost issue is a big issue. (that
means the company is willing to spend money
on IT...exactly the kind of customers I am looking for by the way).

Oh, by the way, that system that just lets you magically published to some
web site and not worry about users? Can you give me a example of such a
publishing system FROM ANY vendor? I mean, we had bucket loads of asp.net
developers (10 years now). Do you have a link to a nice little asp.net
application with a database and no logon?

Remember, access 2010 only been out a few months. See my other post, those
were all SharePoint web sites, and pubic facing ones at that.

> It made sense. Initially I figured a user was something like "owner",
> "developer". and "user".

And what are you going to use to control the web site content? What web
pages, what documents, what applications? Surely you don't think the
computer just runs one application like access?

The problem in the case of a web server is with many users, so you better
have a system-wide well thought out Security System in place.

You're certainly not suggesting that every single web page has a signup
process? And then every single application on the web site ALSO need some
type of signup process? Exactly how do you propose to manage this process?
How do you propose to manage the security for all that stuff? And, if they
already have a system, but you introduce another hosted system, now you have
ANOTHER big mess of user logons to deal with?

> And you paid for some disk space on a hosting site. And the app
> determined what records to display or what forms and reports a user had
> based on a key they'd enter. Like in the login form.

If it was easy, then find me the asp.net + database and a public facing site
without a logon then?

> Surely there's some justification...somewhere.

Sure, there is, but I can't teach you to fly in one newsgroup post.

And, there is a ton of new questions here.

The big problem is that suspect that in another year or so, everyone in this
group going to finally wake up and realize how important the WEB is.
Precious time is being wasted here for those not jumping on the WEB
bandwagon. It is SO VERY important for the future of our industry, and MORE
important for future work as a developer to get up to speed on web based
technologies.

I remembered when I started working in this wonderful industry, it was
around the time of clipper, FoxPro, dbase etc. When windows and the mouse
with a GUI came out, there was a whole big chunk of developers that simply
did not make the transitions into windows based programming (we could call
this paradigm change the transition into "event driven programming"). They
really just did not see the writing on the wall, or did not care. Or they
were not interested in going to the next new technology ways that was
hitting our industry.

I fear I'm witnessing the same thing again for web based technologies, and
all too many developers are failing to realize how significantly important
it is to start dealing with the realities of web based development. You have
to start setting time aside, and make an actual on its commitment to say
that it's important to upgrade your skill set and to start to learn how the
some these web based system work. It does not have to SharePoint, but you
better pick some horse right now, because all of the horses have left the
starting Gate.

I mean exactly what platform to you plan to learn that will let you deploy
forms, code and logic, and reports that a typical business needs? You have
to adopt something, because any of these technologies are going to take you
a good year or so to get up to speed on learning the systems. All during the
while you have to keep your regular life up and running. So, this is hard to
do but if you don't adopt some of these technologies, you're going to sorely
miss some opportunity's that are available in the marketplace right now..

I like SharePoint because it tends to allow one to take traditional classic
business processes that most access developers have worked with, and move
them towards the web over time. (unfortunately, the reality is, is I will be
using some asp.net here also).

However, what ever you choose, you have to pick something that will make you
productive like ms-access. MORE importantly has a good adoption rate by
businesses, and will THEN allow you to write software and deploy into that
marketplace.

Access is great right now, because you can build something, and deploy it to
windows desktop. So, you better come up with the same scenario for web based
systems, otherwise you could learn 4 or 5 different web based technologies,
but not be able to write an application that you can deploy and use parts of
libraries over and over to the many clients you expect to have over the
years. If every single customer in every web site and application you build
is like starting from scratch, you're not going to get anywhere in this
industry.

I try to answer some questions of the road to the web here:

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Toweb/Index.html

I again am just plain out of time, and have to stop. I could type a book of
more issues here, but the above and that link will start to answer some
questions.

Albert K.


From: Salad on 26 Jul 2010 19:12
Albert D. Kallal wrote:
> "Salad" <salad(a)oilandvinegar.com> wrote in message
> news:Yf2dnSbQfalmU9DRnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com...
>
>> Ignorance is bliss.
>
> Golly, I am in a good mood, so I shall not comment on the above!
>>
>> When I heard the phrase "publish to the web", I mistakenly thought I
>> could provide a link to the database to users and they could come in
>> to the site, run reports, etc.
>
> Yes, the above is in fact quite correct. On the other hand, I don't
> think you taken the time to realize what is involved in a web based
> application.
>
> Can you find me an example of a database online and don't have to login
> that was written in asp.net for example? (and, asp.net been out for
> years!).

Hi Albert. I'm posting another question with the subject line "Can
AlbertCo's tables be accessed?"

> Few if any business wants a system WIDE OPEN to the public without some
> kind of sign up or logon process. In fact, I not found any business that
> is looking to do this with their Access applications either.
>
Yes. I follow that correctly. Initially I figured some people might
want to run a survey or perhaps items they have for sale. In such a
situation I would want anyone to run the app to do so. But I don't want
some external Joe Blow to come in and run my business reports or
access my customer lists. On such a case, the database should be private.
>>
>> Then I learned that that user needs to be a user in the Sharepoint
>> server.
>
> Not true. You can allow and use anonymous users, but the use of that is
> very limited. And, there is some licensing issues in terms of cost when
> you do it this way.
>
> You have to step back and think about the dance of the systems you need
> here. What database server are you going to adopt to store your data?
> What security for that database server are now going to going to use? So
> you mean you throw up a web form, but the database server is going to be
> 100% open to the public? Everyone can now take away your data? We see on
> a daily basis all of these data thefts that are occurring on the
> Internet because simply too many people not given this issue a thought.

OK. I understand that.
>
> If you don't have a secure mechanism that the database server
> recognizes, how are you going to prevent each user from not seeing data
> you don't want them to see? And in fact what about general web pages
> that you want some users to view, and others to not view? You think you
> going to write code and security into every web page you build? A good
> portion of those web pages are not going to be access forms. You REALLY
> need to adopt some overall secure model for your web systems, regardless
> of what your goal is here.
>
OK. Got that.

> You might have 10 different applications that you're running on that
> system. How are those 10 different applications going to know what
> security and what person and who is accessing that information? You
> really do need some type of mechanism for creating a user that all
> applications can adhere to. When you start looking at SharePoint, there
> is a absolute truckload of other services and things that you'll need
> (and want) to utilize.

I'm glad you are providing an example below.

> For example what system do you think access uses on sharepoint for
> rendering access reports? (answer: it uses SQL server reporting
> services). You don't think they built a web based reporting system just
> for access did you? Exactly what kind of software budgets and how big of
> a team do you think they have here? However, just like a typical access
> appliation might use Word or Outlook, the web is the SAME...you need
> other systems.
>
I understand.

> As for having to adopt sharepoint? Yes, this is a big issue. However, it
> not so much different then if you write for the oracle database server,
> you're certainly not gonna be able to take your application and publish
> it to a site that runs that Oracle database on that server are you? And
> if you're hosting provider doesn't have oracle databases, what you're
> writing is not going to work is it?

Got that.

> And if you write your application to specifications use mySQL, that
> application will not work with SQL or Oracle will it?

Ok.

> So the idea of a one click to publish to some system, certainly means
> that you're going to have to adopt a web server with a FIXED set of
> standards. I mean if you use one vendors reporting system to render and
> build reports, obviously if your hosting provider does not support that
> particular report writer, then your applications not gonna work is it?

No. It won't.

> You can write to the LAMP standard (linux, Apache, MySql, PHP). Of
> course if you write to that standard, and your hosting provider doesn't
> support the systems in LAMP, then you never be able to publish to that
> site? And, again, what report writing system are you going to use here?
> And are you going to be able to convince the hosting provider, or the
> company you doing work for to adopt and install and set up and maintain
> and support that report writer? (gee, this is starting to get a little
> bit complicated, isn't it?).
>
It's getting there but understandable.

> If you decide to adopt asp.net, then your web server (or your customers
> current hosting) better be running those .net technologies. If you
> write to oracle standards, then again, you need those exact systems and
> support on that web server.

Right.

> So what happens if they already have a website right now? And you now
> need to interact with your access application? So, you suggest ANOTHER
> hosting provider and now what about all of their current logons and
> current users and current customer Service Systems that they have on
> their existing web server?
>
> So, now all the customers have to sign up again to use another
> application with another set of users and passwords. And, who is gonna
> manage all the resetting and management of all these passwords? Great,
> we sold a web site, but now we spending all day resetting customers
> passwords, and looking up forgotten user names. (how on earth is this
> kind of proposal going to save them money?).
>
> IN ALL OF THE ABOVE cases if just one of the technologies from the web
> server from using Apache in place of IIS web server means your
> applications not going to work. This is not a whole lot different then
> writing your software for Foxpro, and then assuming it's going to run
> under ms access.
>
> And, you better be able to tie the reporting system, the database
> system, email, documents, pictures...everything into ONE security model.
>
> So in the case of having to adopt sharepoint, there's some really great
> up-sides that solves a HUGE list of issues and problems.
> And, yes there also no question that the cost issue is a big issue.
> (that means the company is willing to spend money
> on IT...exactly the kind of customers I am looking for by the way).
>
That is the crux of the issue.

> Oh, by the way, that system that just lets you magically published to
> some web site and not worry about users? Can you give me a example of
> such a publishing system FROM ANY vendor? I mean, we had bucket loads of
> asp.net developers (10 years now). Do you have a link to a nice little
> asp.net application with a database and no logon?

Doubtful. But here's a question. Is it cheaper for a company have SQL
server, some data tables, and have an ASP person write an app. Or is it
cheaper to have a hosting site and write an AccessApp?

And how does one handle this issue. You get a Sharepoint site and have
5 apps on it. Are the users app specific where certains users can log
into that app or have rights to it but not others?

> Remember, access 2010 only been out a few months. See my other post,
> those were all SharePoint web sites, and pubic facing ones at that.
>
>> It made sense. Initially I figured a user was something like "owner",
>> "developer". and "user".
>
>
> And what are you going to use to control the web site content? What web
> pages, what documents, what applications? Surely you don't think the
> computer just runs one application like access?

No. I just wrote an app where the user selects a project. All parts,
locations, inventory, etc for the specific project are displayed to the
user. Instead of having an app for one clients and virtually the same
for another another app everything is contained in one app. So if I was
Salad at SaladCo I expect to see data related to my company. I don't
expect to see date for JobBlowCo.

Nor do I expect the company that is hosting your app to only store data
from AlbertCo.

> The problem in the case of a web server is with many users, so you
> better have a system-wide well thought out Security System in place.
>
> You're certainly not suggesting that every single web page has a signup
> process? And then every single application on the web site ALSO need
> some type of signup process? Exactly how do you propose to manage this
> process? How do you propose to manage the security for all that stuff?
> And, if they already have a system, but you introduce another hosted
> system, now you have ANOTHER big mess of user logons to deal with?
>
>> And you paid for some disk space on a hosting site. And the app
>> determined what records to display or what forms and reports a user
>> had based on a key they'd enter. Like in the login form.
>
> If it was easy, then find me the asp.net + database and a public facing
> site without a logon then?

No need.
>
>> Surely there's some justification...somewhere.
>
> Sure, there is, but I can't teach you to fly in one newsgroup post.

But I WANT to fly, Albert.
>
> And, there is a ton of new questions here.
>
> The big problem is that suspect that in another year or so, everyone in
> this group going to finally wake up and realize how important the WEB
> is. Precious time is being wasted here for those not jumping on the WEB
> bandwagon. It is SO VERY important for the future of our industry, and
> MORE important for future work as a developer to get up to speed on web
> based technologies.

I understand that. But I'm simply a small guy. Let's say I have a
company of 100 people (OK, not so small). I want to know update their
skills set list so I can plan for future projects. So now I go out and
get 100 licenses on sharepoint so they can basically do a survey.

Is it worth it to buy 100 licenses that may or may not ever be used again?


> I remembered when I started working in this wonderful industry, it was
> around the time of clipper, FoxPro, dbase etc. When windows and the
> mouse with a GUI came out, there was a whole big chunk of developers
> that simply did not make the transitions into windows based programming
> (we could call this paradigm change the transition into "event driven
> programming"). They really just did not see the writing on the wall, or
> did not care. Or they were not interested in going to the next new
> technology ways that was hitting our industry.
>
> I fear I'm witnessing the same thing again for web based technologies,
> and all too many developers are failing to realize how significantly
> important it is to start dealing with the realities of web based
> development. You have to start setting time aside, and make an actual on
> its commitment to say that it's important to upgrade your skill set and
> to start to learn how the some these web based system work. It does not
> have to SharePoint, but you better pick some horse right now, because
> all of the horses have left the starting Gate.
>
Albert. Count me in as a person that recognizes it.

However, I don't own a company that has 50 or a hundred employees so I
don't know if a business owner is going to say "Let's do it. $500 a
month isn't much to run an application.

> I mean exactly what platform to you plan to learn that will let you
> deploy forms, code and logic, and reports that a typical business needs?
> You have to adopt something, because any of these technologies are going
> to take you a good year or so to get up to speed on learning the
> systems. All during the while you have to keep your regular life up and
> running. So, this is hard to do but if you don't adopt some of these
> technologies, you're going to sorely miss some opportunity's that are
> available in the marketplace right now..
>
Adopting is fine. And Canada is solvent, the US is insolvent. So
issues you experience may be different than those down south. If I want
to give my clients a method to see a status of an order, do I want to
spend $7-8 to give a license for them to view it? And some will use the
feature but others won't. I have to draw the line at how much those
clients are worth.

> I like SharePoint because it tends to allow one to take traditional
> classic business processes that most access developers have worked with,
> and move them towards the web over time. (unfortunately, the reality is,
> is I will be using some asp.net here also).
>
> However, what ever you choose, you have to pick something that will make
> you productive like ms-access. MORE importantly has a good adoption rate
> by businesses, and will THEN allow you to write software and deploy into
> that marketplace.
>
Yes.

> Access is great right now, because you can build something, and deploy
> it to windows desktop. So, you better come up with the same scenario for
> web based systems, otherwise you could learn 4 or 5 different web based
> technologies, but not be able to write an application that you can
> deploy and use parts of libraries over and over to the many clients you
> expect to have over the years. If every single customer in every web
> site and application you build is like starting from scratch, you're not
> going to get anywhere in this industry.
>

I get that.'

> I try to answer some questions of the road to the web here:
>
> http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal/Toweb/Index.html
>
> I again am just plain out of time, and have to stop. I could type a book
> of more issues here, but the above and that link will start to answer
> some questions.
>
I agree with what you say but am still confused. Asking a boss to shell
out perhaps thousands of dollars at the current rates may be expecting
much for surveys, skill sets, project updates, etc.


> Albert K.
>
>
From: Albert D. Kallal on 27 Jul 2010 15:03
"Salad" <salad(a)oilandvinegar.com> wrote in message
news:5_OdnaAm0tTRi9PRnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d(a)earthlink.com...

> Doubtful. But here's a question. Is it cheaper for a company have SQL
> server, some data tables, and have an ASP person write an app. Or is it
> cheaper to have a hosting site and write an AccessApp?
>

I have a couple minutes here.

First of all there is more hosting choices than likely there is flavors of
ice cream.

You can purchase shared resources which will be cheaper, you can purchase
cloud editions in which it starts at about $5.00 per month per person,
there's many.

I mean here is $20 per month with up to 1000 users:

http://www.sharepointhosting.com/sharepoint-pricing.html

However before I get your hopes up too high, keep in mind that you need the
"enterprise" edition on SharePoint.

You can even use the free SharePoint site from Microsoft if you want to use
linked tables to SharePoint. (your other question) Go to www.officelive.com
(that is a free SharePoint site from Microsoft), this free small business
edition is only available to North America customers right now however.

So just keep in mind you have an unbelievably big wide array of choices
here, and to plug one simple pricing model out of the air is a mistake on
your part

Here is 3 users starting at $50 per month at accesshosting:
http://www.accesshosting.com/Pricing/pricing.htm


> And how does one handle this issue. You get a Sharepoint site and have 5
> apps on it. Are the users app specific where certains users can log into
> that app or have rights to it but not others?

In a general answer yes (but it more complicated then that).
All of the Security Systems for windows, including SharePoint works a lot in
theory how user level security for access worked. In some cases some other
restrictions of data the information will certainly be part of the
application code, but you still need some type of authentication system.

> No. I just wrote an app where the user selects a project. All parts,
> locations, inventory, etc for the specific project are displayed to the
> user. Instead of having an app for one clients and virtually the same for
> another another app everything is contained in one app. So if I was Salad
> at SaladCo I expect to see data related to my company. I don't expect to
> see date for JobBlowCo.

Right and if you automate word to created a document into a folder, how can
you restrict other users in your building from going into that folder and
looking at those documents? This is why so many times when I've met the
access team in Redmond I've been asking for windows integrated security
into access. That means you could use the windows logon to control this. If
I automate word and some documents into a particular folder and directory
that the user has permissions then you can write simple word automation code
to create those documents into that folder. Only people within the
organizations that have permissions to that particular directory and folder
will be able to go in there and pull out those documents.

The exact same thing occurs in the web land. However, if you create a table
and give permissions for people to use it, then YOU ARE going have to write
code and ensure that others can't see those records (this would be despite
all users having permissions to that particular table - how you do this is
too long of a post here).

>>
> Adopting is fine. And Canada is solvent, the US is insolvent.

Well in fact the recession at least brings a huge amount a sensibility back
to business in making decisions. The person coming in the door that wants to
sell new carpets or new desks or a new paint job on the walls or even a new
computer has to justify that they're going to save the company money. In
most cases they can't do it.

And if you walk in the door and pitch to the company that they should
upgrade their payroll system, they look at their old 25 year old FoxPro
payroll system, and say it runs perfectly fine, and I actually have to agree
that by updating to a brand new edition of the payroll system, they WILL NOT
be able to justify the cost of any money savings. If you think about it,
this is also why some areas of our business there's less work to be had,
because all the applications over the last 20 years have been written and
adopted. Last time I looked software does not rust or wear out.

However if you read my web site and read that article I gave the mythical
example about the accountant and the payroll system. Fact of the matter is
one hour per day means as much as 20 hours a week saved. In fact, I don't
need any kind of sales pitch to have those people throwing money at me
before a walk out the door. (this is also why talked about these
opportunity's will not exist for very many years in our industry, and it's a
great opportunity to carve out some new business clients).

This is not salesman job anymore, it's a simple mathematic statement that I
have a magical blocks that's going to save your business money day in day
out. You can't make that claim like this when they purchase new carpet, or
by that new desk. Software (and especially these new web portals ) when done
right is a labor saving and money saving purchase.

The company I am pitching in application two right now will potentially save
them one part time staff every month. The payback time in savings of labor
is probably only a month or two. How on earth would a business not purchase
something that's going to save them that kind of spectacular kind of money
in such a short time?

What this means is that if you can find something in this recession to sell
that saves a company a lot of money, then you really don't have to spend
much time trying to sell it to people do you?

> I agree with what you say but am still confused. Asking a boss to shell
> out perhaps thousands of dollars at the current rates may be expecting
> much for surveys, skill sets, project updates, etc.

SharePoint one the most successful products Microsoft has ever launched, it
became a billion dollar product faster than any other product. The reason is
is because it allows you to start taking your business processes and move
them out to the web, which can save money.

For company to start down the road of web based development and processes
for the customers, it's a big decision. I suppose you could bring in a whole
bunch of IT people, and go through all enormous expenses and dangers of
security of setting up a web host server. And THEN you run ONLY ONE little
application you build? That would be by buying a big truck to deliver one
little package to your customers!

I mean if you're going to go through all that trouble and time a setting up
and spending all that money to build and run that server, then SharePoint is
not much more cost and not much more effort then any other server. When you
purchase SharePoint you get everything from customer surveys, workflow
management, document management (check in/check out of documents). meeting
management, documents sites for collaborating with your customers projects
(where all involved in the project can have a central location for all the
documents and specifications for that project). All of these features would
likely cost you millions of dollars to develop, and you're talking about all
of the expense of buying a huge web site to run one little application?

Now who making a better sales pitch? The fact of the matter is it will cost
you several thousands of dollars to get ANY server up and running anyway.
The basic cost of $4400 for the SharePoint license becomes very reasonable
when you spread out over what you're going to do for the company. On the
other hand I know of few (if any) of the really small businesses that are
willing to go through the expense of setting up and running a web server,
and I'm talking about a web server of any type of flavor. In these cases
they don't have the personnel and people, so the best choice for the
situations is hosted solutions, and again we have a lot of choices in this
regards.

I would be the first to admit it doesn't make sense to purchase SharePoint
to run one little access application either. The idea that businesses will
purchase something that they don't need in this tough economic market is
absolutely insane. And no one is suggesting you attempt to sell something
that they don't need, not even will I do that to my clients.

My only point in tough economic times, I prefer this business market because
when I walk into a client I'm offering them a magical box that saves them
labor time and money, and that's the easiest thing in the world to sell,
especially in a tough economy. Prior to this tough economy, businesses were
spending money on all kinds a stupid things, now they can't do that anymore.

When everyone was switching from green screens (DOS type systems) to the
windows, there was a lot of work that was created. Each one of these big
changes is a great opportunity in terms of new work and launching new
products (I just sold my first room booking example last week, and that
means they just purchased 2010 SharePoint). In a few years when the systems
are more popular, I will also have 2 to 3 years jump and also more
experience than everybody else when they wake up and realized what occurred
(just like when we changed from DOS to windows).

This whole march towards the web is likely one of the last big great
opportunity's are going to see our industry.


Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
PleaseNoSpam_kallal(a)msn.com


From: Mark Andrews on 27 Jul 2010 15:36
Nice posts Albert! I used Sharepoint for years and I need to find time to
explore sharepoint 2010 and access2010 and it's capabilities.

Have you tried Microsoft CRM? It works as a very nice framework for web
development, where you can supplement
any limitations with some custom asp.net code. You don't need to use the
"out of the box" screens designed for CRM, it's easy to use it more like a
framework to build solutions. The screen designer is somewhat similar to
access, drag fields, set properties etc....

I also keep in the back of my head just using screen scraping remote tools
(terminal services, citrix, winconnet etc...) and just run regular access
databases over the internet. Then you don't have any web limitations (show
records 1 thru 20 of 15,000) etc....

Having no vba code seems like it would be tough, never tried it.

My two cents,
Mark

"Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkallal(a)msn.com> wrote in message
news:_3G3o.45458$YX3.19010(a)newsfe18.iad...
> "Salad" <salad(a)oilandvinegar.com> wrote in message
> news:5_OdnaAm0tTRi9PRnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d(a)earthlink.com...
>
>> Doubtful. But here's a question. Is it cheaper for a company have SQL
>> server, some data tables, and have an ASP person write an app. Or is it
>> cheaper to have a hosting site and write an AccessApp?
>>
>
> I have a couple minutes here.
>
> First of all there is more hosting choices than likely there is flavors of
> ice cream.
>
> You can purchase shared resources which will be cheaper, you can purchase
> cloud editions in which it starts at about $5.00 per month per person,
> there's many.
>
> I mean here is $20 per month with up to 1000 users:
>
> http://www.sharepointhosting.com/sharepoint-pricing.html
>
> However before I get your hopes up too high, keep in mind that you need
> the "enterprise" edition on SharePoint.
>
> You can even use the free SharePoint site from Microsoft if you want to
> use linked tables to SharePoint. (your other question) Go to
> www.officelive.com (that is a free SharePoint site from Microsoft), this
> free small business edition is only available to North America customers
> right now however.
>
> So just keep in mind you have an unbelievably big wide array of choices
> here, and to plug one simple pricing model out of the air is a mistake on
> your part
>
> Here is 3 users starting at $50 per month at accesshosting:
> http://www.accesshosting.com/Pricing/pricing.htm
>
>
>> And how does one handle this issue. You get a Sharepoint site and have 5
>> apps on it. Are the users app specific where certains users can log into
>> that app or have rights to it but not others?
>
> In a general answer yes (but it more complicated then that).
> All of the Security Systems for windows, including SharePoint works a lot
> in theory how user level security for access worked. In some cases some
> other restrictions of data the information will certainly be part of the
> application code, but you still need some type of authentication system.
>
>> No. I just wrote an app where the user selects a project. All parts,
>> locations, inventory, etc for the specific project are displayed to the
>> user. Instead of having an app for one clients and virtually the same
>> for another another app everything is contained in one app. So if I was
>> Salad at SaladCo I expect to see data related to my company. I don't
>> expect to see date for JobBlowCo.
>
> Right and if you automate word to created a document into a folder, how
> can you restrict other users in your building from going into that folder
> and looking at those documents? This is why so many times when I've met
> the access team in Redmond I've been asking for windows integrated
> security into access. That means you could use the windows logon to
> control this. If I automate word and some documents into a particular
> folder and directory that the user has permissions then you can write
> simple word automation code to create those documents into that folder.
> Only people within the organizations that have permissions to that
> particular directory and folder will be able to go in there and pull out
> those documents.
>
> The exact same thing occurs in the web land. However, if you create a
> table and give permissions for people to use it, then YOU ARE going have
> to write code and ensure that others can't see those records (this would
> be despite all users having permissions to that particular table - how
> you do this is too long of a post here).
>
>>>
>> Adopting is fine. And Canada is solvent, the US is insolvent.
>
> Well in fact the recession at least brings a huge amount a sensibility
> back to business in making decisions. The person coming in the door that
> wants to sell new carpets or new desks or a new paint job on the walls or
> even a new computer has to justify that they're going to save the company
> money. In most cases they can't do it.
>
> And if you walk in the door and pitch to the company that they should
> upgrade their payroll system, they look at their old 25 year old FoxPro
> payroll system, and say it runs perfectly fine, and I actually have to
> agree that by updating to a brand new edition of the payroll system, they
> WILL NOT be able to justify the cost of any money savings. If you think
> about it, this is also why some areas of our business there's less work to
> be had, because all the applications over the last 20 years have been
> written and adopted. Last time I looked software does not rust or wear
> out.
>
> However if you read my web site and read that article I gave the mythical
> example about the accountant and the payroll system. Fact of the matter is
> one hour per day means as much as 20 hours a week saved. In fact, I don't
> need any kind of sales pitch to have those people throwing money at me
> before a walk out the door. (this is also why talked about these
> opportunity's will not exist for very many years in our industry, and it's
> a great opportunity to carve out some new business clients).
>
> This is not salesman job anymore, it's a simple mathematic statement that
> I have a magical blocks that's going to save your business money day in
> day out. You can't make that claim like this when they purchase new
> carpet, or by that new desk. Software (and especially these new web
> portals ) when done right is a labor saving and money saving purchase.
>
> The company I am pitching in application two right now will potentially
> save them one part time staff every month. The payback time in savings of
> labor is probably only a month or two. How on earth would a business not
> purchase something that's going to save them that kind of spectacular kind
> of money in such a short time?
>
> What this means is that if you can find something in this recession to
> sell that saves a company a lot of money, then you really don't have to
> spend much time trying to sell it to people do you?
>
>> I agree with what you say but am still confused. Asking a boss to shell
>> out perhaps thousands of dollars at the current rates may be expecting
>> much for surveys, skill sets, project updates, etc.
>
> SharePoint one the most successful products Microsoft has ever launched,
> it became a billion dollar product faster than any other product. The
> reason is is because it allows you to start taking your business processes
> and move them out to the web, which can save money.
>
> For company to start down the road of web based development and processes
> for the customers, it's a big decision. I suppose you could bring in a
> whole bunch of IT people, and go through all enormous expenses and dangers
> of security of setting up a web host server. And THEN you run ONLY ONE
> little application you build? That would be by buying a big truck to
> deliver one little package to your customers!
>
> I mean if you're going to go through all that trouble and time a setting
> up and spending all that money to build and run that server, then
> SharePoint is not much more cost and not much more effort then any other
> server. When you purchase SharePoint you get everything from customer
> surveys, workflow management, document management (check in/check out of
> documents). meeting management, documents sites for collaborating with
> your customers projects (where all involved in the project can have a
> central location for all the documents and specifications for that
> project). All of these features would likely cost you millions of dollars
> to develop, and you're talking about all of the expense of buying a huge
> web site to run one little application?
>
> Now who making a better sales pitch? The fact of the matter is it will
> cost you several thousands of dollars to get ANY server up and running
> anyway. The basic cost of $4400 for the SharePoint license becomes very
> reasonable when you spread out over what you're going to do for the
> company. On the other hand I know of few (if any) of the really small
> businesses that are willing to go through the expense of setting up and
> running a web server, and I'm talking about a web server of any type of
> flavor. In these cases they don't have the personnel and people, so the
> best choice for the situations is hosted solutions, and again we have a
> lot of choices in this regards.
>
> I would be the first to admit it doesn't make sense to purchase SharePoint
> to run one little access application either. The idea that businesses
> will purchase something that they don't need in this tough economic market
> is absolutely insane. And no one is suggesting you attempt to sell
> something that they don't need, not even will I do that to my clients.
>
> My only point in tough economic times, I prefer this business market
> because when I walk into a client I'm offering them a magical box that
> saves them labor time and money, and that's the easiest thing in the world
> to sell, especially in a tough economy. Prior to this tough economy,
> businesses were spending money on all kinds a stupid things, now they
> can't do that anymore.
>
> When everyone was switching from green screens (DOS type systems) to the
> windows, there was a lot of work that was created. Each one of these big
> changes is a great opportunity in terms of new work and launching new
> products (I just sold my first room booking example last week, and that
> means they just purchased 2010 SharePoint). In a few years when the
> systems are more popular, I will also have 2 to 3 years jump and also more
> experience than everybody else when they wake up and realized what
> occurred (just like when we changed from DOS to windows).
>
> This whole march towards the web is likely one of the last big great
> opportunity's are going to see our industry.
>
>
> Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
> Edmonton, Alberta Canada
> PleaseNoSpam_kallal(a)msn.com
>
>
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Access 2010 x64 problem.
Next: converting to access2003 from access97