 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
MS Access Forum / General 2 / May 2007Choosing Excel or Access
I am not an expert in Excel and Access, but after trying to create Macro using VBA in Excel and I also have developed a simple Access database in tracking supplier invoices including it's aging. I do not know what is the difference between excel and Access in term of it's capacity and best fit with our: 1. Supplier Inivoice monitoring, outstading, payment, aging 2. ROM ( Reguset of Material) Monitoring, starting from request until opening P.O 3, P.O ( Purchase Order) issuing based on approved ROM, but before we open it, if possible we can be automatically seeing the lowest price from each supplier Appreciate any idea on this. I will try to do it myself, I have finished number one, using Access database, but item 2 and 3 above are currently done in excel, but I see to many work repetions. I just joined this company and I want to improve the system, my specialist is Finance and Accounting but I am interested to know more about Office programs Frank Jakarta, Indonesia Hi Frank, The main difference between Access and Excel is that Excel is a flat file structure, and Access is relational. If you are after a database solution, use Access. If you have a bunch of data that you want to perform financial calculations on use Excel. Don't try to use Excel as a "database" as once you get past anything more complex than a few items you will find yourself tied in knots. Hope this helps. Damian. > I am not an expert in Excel and Access, but after trying to create Macro > using VBA in Excel and I also have developed a simple Access database in [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Frank > Jakarta, Indonesia Thanks Damian for your idea. One thing that I want to ask you, how can I reduce number of records, say for all paid invoices I want to archive it. I notice that if we delete supplier A which is linked to invoices, all the invoicess also will be deleted. Can you explain what is the best way in archiving the records which are linked in our databased. Thanks a lot Frank S > Hi Frank, > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Frank > > Jakarta, Indonesia > Thanks Damian for your idea. One thing that I want to ask you, how > can I reduce number of records, say for all paid invoices I want to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Can you explain what is the best way in archiving the records which > are linked in our databased. Since you can have a database up to 2 gig total size, few users need to "archive" there data anywhere. The usual thing is to add a binary (yes no) field and use that to archive (hide) the data you would normally remove and store someplace else. That works well with access. > Thanks a lot > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >>> Frank >>> Jakarta, Indonesia  SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit Isn't the limit for a single table.. uh 1gb? and 2gb is the database size limit? and you can't enforce referential integrity between linked databases? what a crap solution; just use SQL Server... it's FREE KIDS On May 15, 5:12 am, "Joseph Meehan" <sligoNoSPAM...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Damian for your idea. One thing that I want to ask you, how > > can I reduce number of records, say for all paid invoices I want to [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > > - Show quoted text - "T o d o s M e no s [M S F T] " <t o d o s_ m e no s _ m s f t @hotmail.com> wrote: >Isn't the limit for a single table.. uh 1gb? and 2gb is the database >size limit? > >and you can't enforce referential integrity between linked databases? > >what a crap solution; just use SQL Server... it's FREE KIDS Note that this person is really A a r o n K e m p f and that he is not an employee of Microsoft. Tony SignatureTony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can read the entire thread of messages. Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/ CORRECTION If you have to perform a bunch of financial calculations; THEN USE A DATABASE INSTEAD OF REINVENTING THE WHEEL On May 14, 8:35 pm, Damian S <Dami...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote: > Hi Frank, > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > CORRECTION > > If you have to perform a bunch of financial calculations; THEN USE A > DATABASE INSTEAD OF REINVENTING THE WHEEL I guess Aaron's knowledge of Excel and spreadsheets is equal to his knowledge of Access. Not too good. SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit joseph are you f.cking kidding me? why does anone use Excel for anythnig? BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW A BETTER TOOL? On May 15, 10:16 am, "Joseph Meehan" <sligoNoSPAM...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > CORRECTION > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Dia 's Muire duit you should use access until you understand how databases work.. then you should move to SQL Server On May 14, 8:22 pm, Frank Situmorang <frank.situmor...@kinden.co.id> wrote: > I am not an expert in Excel and Access, but after trying to create Macro > using VBA in Excel and I also have developed a simple Access database in [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Frank > Jakarta, Indonesia > you should use access until you understand how databases work.. then > you should move to SQL Server Frank, there are reasons to use an SQL server including very large data requirements, but few people have any need to. Aaron (aka many other names) tends to believe Access is a false religion and not a good database tool. SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit CORRECTION! EVERYONE SHOULD USE SQL SERVER AND ACCESS MDB IS A TOY DATABASE I'VE SUPPORTED HUNDREDS OF USERS ON MDB. BUT IT SUCKS AND IT IS NOT RELIABLE ENOUGH FOR REAL WORLD USAGE LISTEN TO THE TRUTH; NOT THIS PROPAGANDA On May 15, 5:14 am, "Joseph Meehan" <sligoNoSPAM...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > you should use access until you understand how databases work.. then > > you should move to SQL Server [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Dia 's Muire duit Access is not a false religion. Access is a great frontend to SQL Server but Access sure AINT a goddamn database; and it hasn't been for a decade On May 15, 5:14 am, "Joseph Meehan" <sligoNoSPAM...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > you should use access until you understand how databases work.. then > > you should move to SQL Server [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Dia 's Muire duit > Access is not a false religion. > > Access is a great frontend to SQL Server > > but Access sure AINT a goddamn database; and it hasn't been for a > decade No comment needed. However why do you use different names? It seems everyone knows who you are just by looking at your responses. SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit no comment needed? because you finally admit that Access isn't a database? SQL Server isn't any harder to use thn Access; if anything it is easier On May 15, 10:19 am, "Joseph Meehan" <sligoNoSPAM...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Access is not a false religion. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Dia 's Muire duit |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.