Microsoft Cleanliness

I guess I've been working with A97 too long. That program seemed
cleaner than A2003.

Used to be, in A97, you'd have tabs at the top to select what you wanted
to work with; table, query, form, etc. In A2000, MS for some unknown
reason decided to move the tabs to the side. In the database window
they added a couple of wizards to clutter it up instead of . Then they
moved the Open/Design/New to the top instead of the right side. I guess
MS did this because they were bored, needed to justify their groups
existence, and decided to waste developers time by playing with the
developer's mind.

See, this required a rewrite of code for them. They couldn't fix a
couple of simple things that to make a developer's life simpler without
going overboard. For example, select Forms/New/Wizard. Up pops a
dropdown of tables and queries and then the field list. Of course, the
dropdown has only 1 column. To make it more difficult, MS preceeds each
table with the word TABLE and each query with "QUERY". As if I care.
Make Table or Query a second column. I guess MS programmers have never
heard a dropdown can have more than one column.

Now go and drop a combo box on a form. Somebody at MS had common sense
at one time and allowed you to select from Table, Query, or both in A97.
It simply had the table/query name. No excess garbage. But the folks
needed to muck that up in A2000+ as well by adding Query or Table in
front of the Query/Table name. Hello! MS? Ever hear of 2 or more columns?

Or let's say you create a new database and want to import some objects.
Make sure the import window can't be resized. And of course don't
provide the modified/created dates to the users. The dates are usually
totally useless since A2000 because everytime you recompile the remove
all history. They could fix this by adding another date column. This
indicates MS coders have never worked on an application. It also
indicates they take the easy way out and instead of adding some
functionality decide that that extra 15 minutes of coding will cut into
their nap time.

Open up 2 or more modules. Click on Window. Your current window is
clean but they have to add the database name and window name for any
other open windows. Why? Who cares? Why does more garbage make
something better, MS?

And of course leave out a FileOpen dialog box function in all versions.
Didn't that exist in VB1? It did in FoxPro DOS. Of course, MS must
assume Access applications are designed by DFUs, not developers.

Where does MS hire their programmers? In the interview process do they
see if the person can make a mountain out of a molehill, a simple
process more complex? Does MS cry Eureka! when they find such a coder?

I think MS likes drones and order takers for their coders. They
certainly don't have creative people that can say "Hey, if we
implemented this feature it would help out the people that use this
product." Nope. "Hey, here's the specs. Don't think. Just code."
That's the MS way.

MS used to have a "wish list" area you could send them your ideas. That
must be a big ciruclar file called BWAHAHAHAHAHA. The MVPs either have
no say on what can be simple fixes for MS or they're used to mundanity.
The book writers of MS products probably have the most input on the
development process and feature list.

MS should hire a a person that's worked on Access application and help
direct their pie-in-the-sky, ivory tower dreams and get them focused
back into reality. Get rid of the FOC (fresh out of college morons) and
get someone that has worked outside of their world and has been required
to use some imagination.

Re: Microsoft Cleanliness

Salad wrote in
news:13liot3nn259pa8@corp.supernews.com:

> I guess I've been working with A97 too long. That program seemed
> cleaner than A2003.
>
> Used to be, in A97, you'd have tabs at the top to select what you
> wanted to work with; table, query, form, etc. In A2000, MS for some
> unknown reason decided to move the tabs to the side. In the database
> window they added a couple of wizards to clutter it up instead of .
> Then they moved the Open/Design/New to the top instead of the right
> side. I guess MS did this because they were bored, needed to justify
> their groups existence, and decided to waste developers time by
> playing with the developer's mind.
>
> See, this required a rewrite of code for them. They couldn't fix a
> couple of simple things that to make a developer's life simpler
> without going overboard. For example, select Forms/New/Wizard. Up
> pops a dropdown of tables and queries and then the field list. Of
> course, the dropdown has only 1 column. To make it more difficult, MS
> preceeds each table with the word TABLE and each query with "QUERY".
> As if I care. Make Table or Query a second column. I guess MS
> programmers have never heard a dropdown can have more than one column.
>
> Now go and drop a combo box on a form. Somebody at MS had common
> sense at one time and allowed you to select from Table, Query, or both
> in A97.
> It simply had the table/query name. No excess garbage. But the
> folks
> needed to muck that up in A2000+ as well by adding Query or Table in
> front of the Query/Table name. Hello! MS? Ever hear of 2 or more
> columns?
>
> Or let's say you create a new database and want to import some
> objects.
> Make sure the import window can't be resized. And of course don't
> provide the modified/created dates to the users. The dates are
> usually totally useless since A2000 because everytime you recompile
> the remove all history. They could fix this by adding another date
> column. This indicates MS coders have never worked on an application.
> It also indicates they take the easy way out and instead of adding
> some functionality decide that that extra 15 minutes of coding will
> cut into their nap time.
>
> Open up 2 or more modules. Click on Window. Your current window is
> clean but they have to add the database name and window name for any
> other open windows. Why? Who cares? Why does more garbage make
> something better, MS?
>
> And of course leave out a FileOpen dialog box function in all
> versions.
> Didn't that exist in VB1? It did in FoxPro DOS. Of course, MS must
> assume Access applications are designed by DFUs, not developers.
>
> Where does MS hire their programmers? In the interview process do
> they see if the person can make a mountain out of a molehill, a simple
> process more complex? Does MS cry Eureka! when they find such a
> coder?
>
> I think MS likes drones and order takers for their coders. They
> certainly don't have creative people that can say "Hey, if we
> implemented this feature it would help out the people that use this
> product." Nope. "Hey, here's the specs. Don't think. Just code."
> That's the MS way.
>
> MS used to have a "wish list" area you could send them your ideas.
> That must be a big ciruclar file called BWAHAHAHAHAHA. The MVPs
> either have no say on what can be simple fixes for MS or they're used
> to mundanity.
> The book writers of MS products probably have the most input on the
> development process and feature list.
>
> MS should hire a a person that's worked on Access application and help
> direct their pie-in-the-sky, ivory tower dreams and get them focused
> back into reality. Get rid of the FOC (fresh out of college morons)
> and get someone that has worked outside of their world and has been
> required to use some imagination.

Last week the wind blew very hard here from the West for several days. It
was cold and that wind made being outside very uncomfortable. Of course,
a few trees and branches came down, and some roofs were damaged.
It seemed that God had erred.
We have a beautiful marsh, Cootes Paradise, here at the west end of Lake
Ontario but it's been dying for decades because of the invasion of carp,
which muddy the water, and uproot the vegetation.
Our conservation authority built a carp barrier at the entrance to the
marsh from the lake proper, and this prevents carp from coming into the
marsh. For years we've been capturing and removing the carp from the
marsh area, but each year a few hundred remain, and in the spring they
breed; growing conditions are ideal ands soon there are tens of thousands
of carp in the marsh again.
The wind blew all the water from the marsh. The carp were carried along
with the water, or they weren't and died.
At last, after so much effort, the marsh is free of carp.

Please, choose the moral of the story:

1. Most changes have some good results.
or
2. We should get on with life without carping.

--
lyle fairfield

I will arise and go now,
For always night and day
I hear lake water lapping
With low sounds by the shore;
While I stand on the roadway
Or on the pavements gray,
I hear it in the deep heart's core.
- Yeats

Re: Microsoft Cleanliness

"Salad" wrote in message
news:13liot3nn259pa8@corp.supernews.com...
>I guess I've been working with A97 too long. That program seemed cleaner
>than A2003.
>
> Used to be, in A97, you'd have tabs at the top to select what you wanted
> to work with; table, query, form, etc. In A2000, MS for some unknown
> reason decided to move the tabs to the side. In the database window they
> added a couple of wizards to clutter it up instead of . Then they moved
> the Open/Design/New to the top instead of the right side. I guess MS did
> this because they were bored, needed to justify their groups existence,
> and decided to waste developers time by playing with the developer's mind.
>
> See, this required a rewrite of code for them. They couldn't fix a couple
> of simple things that to make a developer's life simpler without going
> overboard. For example, select Forms/New/Wizard. Up pops a dropdown of
> tables and queries and then the field list. Of course, the dropdown has
> only 1 column. To make it more difficult, MS preceeds each table with the
> word TABLE and each query with "QUERY". As if I care. Make Table or Query
> a second column. I guess MS programmers have never heard a dropdown can
> have more than one column.
>
> Now go and drop a combo box on a form. Somebody at MS had common sense at
> one time and allowed you to select from Table, Query, or both in A97. It
> simply had the table/query name. No excess garbage. But the folks needed
> to muck that up in A2000+ as well by adding Query or Table in front of the
> Query/Table name. Hello! MS? Ever hear of 2 or more columns?
>
> Or let's say you create a new database and want to import some objects.
> Make sure the import window can't be resized. And of course don't provide
> the modified/created dates to the users. The dates are usually totally
> useless since A2000 because everytime you recompile the remove all
> history. They could fix this by adding another date column. This
> indicates MS coders have never worked on an application. It also
> indicates they take the easy way out and instead of adding some
> functionality decide that that extra 15 minutes of coding will cut into
> their nap time.
>
> Open up 2 or more modules. Click on Window. Your current window is clean
> but they have to add the database name and window name for any other open
> windows. Why? Who cares? Why does more garbage make something better,
> MS?
>
> And of course leave out a FileOpen dialog box function in all versions.
> Didn't that exist in VB1? It did in FoxPro DOS. Of course, MS must
> assume Access applications are designed by DFUs, not developers.
>
> Where does MS hire their programmers? In the interview process do they
> see if the person can make a mountain out of a molehill, a simple process
> more complex? Does MS cry Eureka! when they find such a coder?
>
> I think MS likes drones and order takers for their coders. They certainly
> don't have creative people that can say "Hey, if we implemented this
> feature it would help out the people that use this product." Nope. "Hey,
> here's the specs. Don't think. Just code." That's the MS way.
>
> MS used to have a "wish list" area you could send them your ideas. That
> must be a big ciruclar file called BWAHAHAHAHAHA. The MVPs either have no
> say on what can be simple fixes for MS or they're used to mundanity. The
> book writers of MS products probably have the most input on the
> development process and feature list.
>
> MS should hire a a person that's worked on Access application and help
> direct their pie-in-the-sky, ivory tower dreams and get them focused back
> into reality. Get rid of the FOC (fresh out of college morons) and get
> someone that has worked outside of their world and has been required to
> use some imagination.
>

I love the A2000 interface, despite the few small quirks that you mention. I
once went back to A97 after being into A2000 for a while, and I was like,
"Whoa! The code modules and the forms are in the same place! How bizarre."
I'd gotten used to have a separate place for the code modules, which is much
better than it was in A97.

The little things like the queries and tables you mentioned, I've noticed,
but I've been like, "Eh, whatcha gonna do..." It really never struck me as a
huge deal.

So if someone forced me to work in A97 with its outdated interface again, I
would grit my teeth and very begrudgingly use it, hoping that I would soon
get to go back to the A2000 interface.

Neil

Re: Microsoft Cleanliness

lyle fairfield wrote:

> Salad wrote in
> news:13liot3nn259pa8@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
>>I guess I've been working with A97 too long. That program seemed
>>cleaner than A2003.
>>
>>Used to be, in A97, you'd have tabs at the top to select what you
>>wanted to work with; table, query, form, etc. In A2000, MS for some
>>unknown reason decided to move the tabs to the side. In the database
>>window they added a couple of wizards to clutter it up instead of .
>>Then they moved the Open/Design/New to the top instead of the right
>>side. I guess MS did this because they were bored, needed to justify
>>their groups existence, and decided to waste developers time by
>>playing with the developer's mind.
>>
>>See, this required a rewrite of code for them. They couldn't fix a
>>couple of simple things that to make a developer's life simpler
>>without going overboard. For example, select Forms/New/Wizard. Up
>>pops a dropdown of tables and queries and then the field list. Of
>>course, the dropdown has only 1 column. To make it more difficult, MS
>>preceeds each table with the word TABLE and each query with "QUERY".
>>As if I care. Make Table or Query a second column. I guess MS
>>programmers have never heard a dropdown can have more than one column.
>>
>>Now go and drop a combo box on a form. Somebody at MS had common
>>sense at one time and allowed you to select from Table, Query, or both
>>in A97.
>> It simply had the table/query name. No excess garbage. But the
>> folks
>>needed to muck that up in A2000+ as well by adding Query or Table in
>>front of the Query/Table name. Hello! MS? Ever hear of 2 or more
>>columns?
>>
>>Or let's say you create a new database and want to import some
>>objects.
>> Make sure the import window can't be resized. And of course don't
>>provide the modified/created dates to the users. The dates are
>>usually totally useless since A2000 because everytime you recompile
>>the remove all history. They could fix this by adding another date
>>column. This indicates MS coders have never worked on an application.
>> It also indicates they take the easy way out and instead of adding
>>some functionality decide that that extra 15 minutes of coding will
>>cut into their nap time.
>>
>>Open up 2 or more modules. Click on Window. Your current window is
>>clean but they have to add the database name and window name for any
>>other open windows. Why? Who cares? Why does more garbage make
>>something better, MS?
>>
>>And of course leave out a FileOpen dialog box function in all
>>versions.
>> Didn't that exist in VB1? It did in FoxPro DOS. Of course, MS must
>>assume Access applications are designed by DFUs, not developers.
>>
>>Where does MS hire their programmers? In the interview process do
>>they see if the person can make a mountain out of a molehill, a simple
>>process more complex? Does MS cry Eureka! when they find such a
>>coder?
>>
>>I think MS likes drones and order takers for their coders. They
>>certainly don't have creative people that can say "Hey, if we
>>implemented this feature it would help out the people that use this
>>product." Nope. "Hey, here's the specs. Don't think. Just code."
>>That's the MS way.
>>
>>MS used to have a "wish list" area you could send them your ideas.
>>That must be a big ciruclar file called BWAHAHAHAHAHA. The MVPs
>>either have no say on what can be simple fixes for MS or they're used
>>to mundanity.
>> The book writers of MS products probably have the most input on the
>>development process and feature list.
>>
>>MS should hire a a person that's worked on Access application and help
>>direct their pie-in-the-sky, ivory tower dreams and get them focused
>>back into reality. Get rid of the FOC (fresh out of college morons)
>>and get someone that has worked outside of their world and has been
>>required to use some imagination.
>
>
> Last week the wind blew very hard here from the West for several days. It
> was cold and that wind made being outside very uncomfortable. Of course,
> a few trees and branches came down, and some roofs were damaged.
> It seemed that God had erred.
> We have a beautiful marsh, Cootes Paradise, here at the west end of Lake
> Ontario but it's been dying for decades because of the invasion of carp,
> which muddy the water, and uproot the vegetation.
> Our conservation authority built a carp barrier at the entrance to the
> marsh from the lake proper, and this prevents carp from coming into the
> marsh. For years we've been capturing and removing the carp from the
> marsh area, but each year a few hundred remain, and in the spring they
> breed; growing conditions are ideal ands soon there are tens of thousands
> of carp in the marsh again.
> The wind blew all the water from the marsh. The carp were carried along
> with the water, or they weren't and died.
> At last, after so much effort, the marsh is free of carp.
>
> Please, choose the moral of the story:
>
> 1. Most changes have some good results.
> or
> 2. We should get on with life without carping.
>
If life's fair, I'd opt for Option # 1. If a person's apathetic, go for
Option # 2.

Your story reminds me of a story here in CA. Lake Davis had some
Northern Pike, a fish I like to catch when I visit Minnesota and
Wisconsin. I love their ferociousness, their teeth, their size,
California was quite xenophobic about them. The Northern Pike were
foreigners to CA, introduced into the waters by some unknown Pike lover.
So CA poisoned the lake. Killed off those pesky Northern Pikes.

A year later, the lake was considered clear of the Northern Pike...until
one was caught in the lake.

I've seen people put a bullet through the carp head as a ridding
solution on a lake. Or simply whack them on the side of the boat until
dead. Doesn't kill them off, guess it provides singular satisfaction.

BTW, I've never understood the folks that use leeches and blood suckers
for fish bait.

GBU
http://youtube.com/watch?v=V3gp7B8WC4Q

Re: Microsoft Cleanliness

Sorry, but this "salad" has apparently been "tossed" too hard at some point!

--
There's ALWAYS more than one way to skin a cat!

Answers/posts based on Access 2000/2003

Message posted via AccessMonster.com
http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/databases-ms-ac cess/200712/1