Let's pick a replacement for this (Access) newsgroup

Folks have recommended various sites to replace this (Access) newsgroup for
when poor-listener Microsoft drops it.

Why don't we pick a replacement to give it the "critical mass" to fully
replace this one? If interested, please respond to this with your
recommendation.

Also, if you feel like it, in case this goes dead, send me an email with
your email address at North9000 at gmail dot com and I'll try to
collect / send out the news/results. (via blind cc)

I did / will be duplicating this in database design, general and new user
Access groups.

USENET newsgroup comp.databases.ms-access (CDMA) has been around longer than
the Microsoft-sponsored newsgroups (Microsoft was still using CompuServe
forums when CDMA was approved). At least one member of the Big-8 Management
Board has indicated he will try to expedite formation of new USENET groups,
if needed. But, the single CDMA newsgroup has worked well... quite a lot of
present and past Microsoft MVPs for Access have indicated they will be
monitoring that group and answering questions.

I see you are posting from Microsoft's online interface... many of the
people who answer questions contend that every online interface they have
seen / used is clumsier, less-effective, prevents working offline, and has
many other drawbacks -- if they were interested in spending more time and
effort to help others, they could just suppress their distaste and use the
clumsy, online, less-effective online forums that Microsoft has proposed.

I agree with that online UI to Q&A is less-effective. Because my ISP dropped
newsgroup support, I have signed up with a news server service -- the one
I'm using is inexpensive, but not free, however there are free news servers
that get good reports. I'm posting right now using that service to
newsgroups that Microsoft has officially dropped, but other servers are not
dropping, so will continue to be useful if you'll get a news server and a
news reader. Outlook Express will work, and there are many free and for-fee
news readers with additional capability.

You will not be able to use the Microsoft online UI with the newsgroups, but
it has had unfixed bugs for months, perhaps years, so is even less useful
now than it once was.

--
Larry Linson, Microsoft Office Access MVP
Co-author: "Microsoft Access Small Business Solutions", published by Wiley
Access newsgroup support is alive and well in USENET
comp.databases.ms-access


"Fred" wrote in message
...
Folks have recommended various sites to replace this (Access) newsgroup
for
when poor-listener Microsoft drops it.

Why don't we pick a replacement to give it the "critical mass" to fully
replace this one? If interested, please respond to this with your
recommendation.

Also, if you feel like it, in case this goes dead, send me an email with
your email address at North9000 at gmail dot com and I'll try to
collect / send out the news/results. (via blind cc)

I did / will be duplicating this in database design, general and new user
Access groups.

Thanks for the info and recommendation.

The experts have been focusing on the technical aspects (news group vs web
interface) but I think that what's more key is an Access-focused
forum/newsgroup, with some subdivisions, and knowing that most people that
are asking a question will need a web site / web interface.

Sincerely,

Fred

=?Utf-8?B?RnJlZA==?= wrote in
:

Thanks for the info and recommendation.

The experts have been focusing on the technical aspects (news
group vs web interface) but I think that what's more key is an
Access-focused forum/newsgroup, with some subdivisions, and
knowing that most people that are asking a question will need a
web site / web interface.

Sincerely,

Fred

Nobody NEEDS a web-based interface. Outlook, Eudora, Opera all do nntp.

There are reams of NNTP clients out there, many free.

=?Utf-8?B?RnJlZA==?= wrote in
:

The experts have been focusing on the technical aspects (news
group vs web interface) but I think that what's more key is an
Access-focused forum/newsgroup, with some subdivisions, and
knowing that most people that are asking a question will need a
web site / web interface.

I vote for a single newsgroup with no subdivisions at all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

"Bob Quintal wrote in message
...
=?Utf-8?B?RnJlZA==?= wrote in
:

Thanks for the info and recommendation.

The experts have been focusing on the technical aspects (news
group vs web interface) but I think that what's more key is an
Access-focused forum/newsgroup, with some subdivisions, and
knowing that most people that are asking a question will need a
web site / web interface.

Sincerely,

Fred

Nobody NEEDS a web-based interface. Outlook, Eudora, Opera all do nntp.

There are reams of NNTP clients out there, many free.


Right, but the stated intention is that this NNTP server is to be shut down.

Unfortunately, the two groups created for access, one is on MSDN (Microsoft
Developer network). This one is separate, not tossed in with any other
product. It for sure setup around developers and is on the developer
network, and if you are a part of the developer network then this group is
for you. There is also a NNTP bridge available. That group is he

Access for Developers
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/For...essdev/threads

the above hierarchy is:

Office Developer Center
Microsoft Office for Developers Forums
Access for Developers

If you are more consumer, and not such a hard core access developer with
general questions, the group is he

msAnswers.
http://social.answers.microsoft.com/...addbuz/threads

I agree with David's comments here that splitting this up is not ideal.
However, many complained and many wanted a section devoted to developers and
thus a group been created on the Microsoft developer network right in the
middle of the developer network and area. So, for the real developers they
been given a area.

I actually think that for many, they would shy away from jumping into the
MSDN developer area to ask most basic questions about access.

I personally would prefer everything stay under msAnswers, but there is a
developer oriented forum for access now that encourages questions of
technical and programming nature if that is your cup of tea.

While I don't think the msAnswers forum works very well with NNTP, the MSDN
one is separate for access, and thus for the NNTP crowd, that should work
quite well with the bridge.

However, my spider sense thinks this group just might stay open awhile
longer then the deadline of today....

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada

"David W. Fenton" wrote in message
36.100...
=?Utf-8?B?RnJlZA==?= wrote in
:

The experts have been focusing on the technical aspects (news
group vs web interface) but I think that what's more key is an
Access-focused forum/newsgroup, with some subdivisions, and
knowing that most people that are asking a question will need a
web site / web interface.

I vote for a single newsgroup with no subdivisions at all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

No, "Access", "Forms", "Formscoding" and "Reports" are the four
sub-divisions that have served us well. And, as Bob posted, there
are many NNTP servers out there, that as far as I've been able to
determine, have no intention of dropping the Microsoft.Public.*
newsgroups.

Bill

I could quibble with your selection of the 4 groups, but the main
thing you missed is "queries". microsoft.public.queries is a fairly
busy group, carrying mostly stuff not handled in the other groups.

(david)


"Bill" wrote in message
m...

"David W. Fenton" wrote in message
36.100...
=?Utf-8?B?RnJlZA==?= wrote in
:

The experts have been focusing on the technical aspects (news
group vs web interface) but I think that what's more key is an
Access-focused forum/newsgroup, with some subdivisions, and
knowing that most people that are asking a question will need a
web site / web interface.

I vote for a single newsgroup with no subdivisions at all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

No, "Access", "Forms", "Formscoding" and "Reports" are the four
sub-divisions that have served us well. And, as Bob posted, there
are many NNTP servers out there, that as far as I've been able to
determine, have no intention of dropping the Microsoft.Public.*
newsgroups.

Bill

Good point. I don't often have difficulties with queries
and completely forgot how important the NG is to those
that might encounter trouble from time to time. Funny
too, as I recently shot a hole in my foot forgetting that
Union queries are not updatable.
Bill


"david" wrote in message
...
I could quibble with your selection of the 4 groups, but the main
thing you missed is "queries". microsoft.public.queries is a fairly
busy group, carrying mostly stuff not handled in the other groups.

(david)


"Bill" wrote in message
m...

"David W. Fenton" wrote in message
36.100...
=?Utf-8?B?RnJlZA==?= wrote in
:

The experts have been focusing on the technical aspects (news
group vs web interface) but I think that what's more key is an
Access-focused forum/newsgroup, with some subdivisions, and
knowing that most people that are asking a question will need a
web site / web interface.

I vote for a single newsgroup with no subdivisions at all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

No, "Access", "Forms", "Formscoding" and "Reports" are the four
sub-divisions that have served us well. And, as Bob posted, there
are many NNTP servers out there, that as far as I've been able to
determine, have no intention of dropping the Microsoft.Public.*
newsgroups.

Bill

I think that I am confused on what "newsgroup" means with regard to the
termination notices. Could somebody enlighten me? As far as I understand
it, there are two definitions of "newsgroups" at work he

1. The Microsoft name for the question and answer area which is nicely
organized with a section for Access, and functionally defined subsections.

2. A technical way of accessing #1 (which I don't understand) which
involves a method other than the Microsoft web interface.

Are they shutting down #1, #2 or both?