scott wrote:
> Excel is good for simple databases with infrequent updates for many 
> reasons, the most important is that almost everyone has it installed on 
> their machine and most people are familiar with it.

I read a while ago that while LOTOS 1-2-3 and visicalc were putting in 
ever-more sophisticated math stuff, MS went and looked at how people were 
actually using the product and realized some surprisingly large number of 
spreadsheets had no formulas at all. So MS made it easier to keep lists of 
stuff in Excel, and that's part of why it won out over those others.

> that only one person can edit it at a time.

Actually, I think nowadays you can set it up for multiple edits and it'll 
coordinate. It seemed simple, but I never had two people actually try at 
once, so take it with a grain.

>> How hard would it be to put this
>> stuff into a trivial Access database? Not very.
> 
> If you have no experience with Access it's not trivial to set it up 
> properly, and if the only perceived benefit is that more than person can 
> edit it at a time it's unlikely to be seen as worthwhile.

Last I looked, Access was only one user at a time making changes too. The 
one guy would lean back in his chair and bellow "IS THERE ANYONE IN THE 
DATABASE?"  That was their locking protocol.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
  "How did he die?"   "He got shot in the hand."
     "That was fatal?"
          "He was holding a live grenade at the time."

Post a reply to this message