[Spirochete]

Agree. I doubted this list as soon as I saw “Microsoft Access”. :)

Access gets a bad rap. 15 years ago, I was hired by a start-up to develop their system specifically in MS Access. It has grown over the years into a mid-level enterprise system. Order processing, inventory, job cost, purchasing, expense claims, DOT emissions compliance, Hazmat safety, production scheduling, ad-hoc inquiry screens, automated email delivery of reports too numerous to count. Just about everything except time clock and payroll.

The caveat here is that the back-end is SQL Server; only the UI and reports are in Access.

[wally_bert]

I’ve found Access 03 can run a fair sized 24/7 manufacturing facility.

If it ever goes kaput, we are in trouble.

[Sirius Lee]

Access gets a bad rap.

Mostly useless unless couple with VBA competence and solid SQL skills.

[Tell It Right]

Eons ago I would make fat-clients that used an Access database for local storage, and made a synchronization process to send the data to a web service tied to an Oracle or MS SQL DB (assuming the client had a good internet connection, which in some cases was a big assumption back in the day). All of the program code and UI would be made outside of Access, connecting to the Access DB through either OLE or ODBC.

There was nothing special about Access except that it was "free" in that all the users had MS Office. I say nothing special, the Jet database engine in Access and FoxPro was probably pretty good for a local client database engine (never expected to compete with a server DB engine). But as far as building the UI in Access I always found that severely lacking, especially compared to MS Visual Studio (both .net and pre .net). And the VBA code base was definitely lacking relative to VB, C# or even FoxPro.