Easy database software

On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 08:35:04 -0500, "Don Phillipson"
wrote:

"Heather Mills" wrote in message
.. .

I'd like to learn enough database programming skills to create simple
databases for personal use, such as to keep track of gifts, music
collection, car maintenance, health care, and reminders.
I have Office 2007 Pro with Access. Is that the best choice . . .

"Database" software nowadays means what the 1990s distinguished
as "relational databases," which are quite powerful tools to organize
data that is connected. HM's needs here seem different -- mainly
just lists, perhaps with simple arithmetic features (e.g. subtotals of
expenditures she has no need to interconnect her appointment
book, car repairs and inventories of music.

It's true that I do not need to interconnect different sets of data
(gifts and car repairs).

As database manuals of the 1990s emphasized, thoughtful analysis beforehand
simplifies the actual tasks: and it may be simpler for HM to use software
she already knows, e.g. Wordpad and Excel
Health ca a text file for medical appointments and a spreadsheet for
(1) expenditures, (2) repeated diagnostic tests, etc.

But then there is no way to connect the appointments with the
recurring tests, etc. This is what I have been doing and I keep
running into limitations that I think would be solved by using a
database.

Gifts: spreadsheet: mine has a new sheet for each year (and keeps
earlier years on other sheets, out of the way but accessible.)

I've been using Word, but essentially the same idea. The pages for
previous years are out of the way, but only marginally accessible. I'd
like to be able to generate a history of how much I gave to each
grandkid for Christmas and annually, and maybe generate a summary
report. One kid might get one large gift and another several smaller
ones. Word can add up a table, but can't do composite sums. Excel can
do that, but it's not really it's forte.

Music, books, etc.: a spreadsheet is in fact a database, each cell being
a database field, enabling sort/search functions etc.
Appointments may be listed in either a text file or a spreadsheet, depending
on complexity.
Data files for each of these purposes may be archived periodically (e.g.
every couple of years) so the old data is stored away securely but does
not impede daily use.

But in a database, there's no need to archive. It's all in the
database, but I filter on what I want to see. I can have forms for
this year and for all years.

"Easy database software" is nowadays not marketed as such. If HM
wishes to use the same SW for all these storage tasks, a "flat file"
database of the 1990s may suit her needs best.

Thanks for the suggestions, but I really do need to bite the bullet
and learn a database program. It sounds like I should start with
Access since I have it and there is lots of help available. It doesn't
sound like FileMaker or any other database program is enough easier to
warrant bothering.

On 17 Dec 2010, Paul in Houston TX wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

Correct. Access is overkill for what she needs unless,
as she said, its just for db practice.

Since she doesn't really tell us what she intends to do, I wouldn't
assume that it's overkill. And she says that she has some "database
programming skills," so I assume she has an idea that a real database
would suit her needs.

Excel might be OK if all she wanted to do was lay things out visually
in a grid, like on a ledger sheet, and/or if she wanted to do
mathematical calculations with that data. But if the data base grows
very large and she will want to do complex searches, a database will be
more appropriate. I've found in almost every case where I started out
keeping track of stuff on a spreadsheet, I later converted it to a
"real" database.

On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:16:48 -0500, Nil
wrote:

On 17 Dec 2010, Paul in Houston TX wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

Correct. Access is overkill for what she needs unless,
as she said, its just for db practice.

Since she doesn't really tell us what she intends to do, I wouldn't
assume that it's overkill. And she says that she has some "database
programming skills," so I assume she has an idea that a real database
would suit her needs.

Excel might be OK if all she wanted to do was lay things out visually
in a grid, like on a ledger sheet, and/or if she wanted to do
mathematical calculations with that data. But if the data base grows
very large and she will want to do complex searches, a database will be
more appropriate. I've found in almost every case where I started out
keeping track of stuff on a spreadsheet, I later converted it to a
"real" database.

Exactly. I already have various lists and tables in Word and Excel. I
am frustrated by the lack of tools (or the contortions needed to make
them work) to do even moderately complicated searches (like a summary
table of what I gave each person for Christmas for the last 5 years).

I really need a database. I've been putting off the learning curve,
but it's time to just do it.

On 17 Dec 2010, Heather Mills wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

Exactly. I already have various lists and tables in Word and
Excel. I am frustrated by the lack of tools (or the contortions
needed to make them work) to do even moderately complicated
searches (like a summary table of what I gave each person for
Christmas for the last 5 years).

I really need a database. I've been putting off the learning
curve, but it's time to just do it.

I don't think Access's learning curve is that great, especially if
you're mainly going to work with single flat databases and you're not
going to be delving too far into relational (multiple, tied-together)
databases, or it's macro and programming languages, or interface
design. For simple databases, it's pretty easy to do complex and/or
searches with its query-by-example interface. The concepts can be a
little foreign to some people, but once you get them down it all
becomes fairly straightforward.

I'm talking about Access 2003. I get the impression that the program
has changed quite a bit since then - I hope it's even easier for the
novice to use, and I also hope the complex under-the-hood stuff is
still accessible.

On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:55:21 -0800, Heather Mills wrote:

I'd like to learn enough database programming skills to create simple
databases for personal use, such as to keep track of gifts, music
collection, car maintenance, health care, and reminders.

I have Office 2007 Pro with Access. Is that the best choice or is there
some other software like FileMaker that would be easier?

If you want those programming skills to be transferable skills then I
suggest you look at one of the SQL implementations such as the free MySQL.
You will then be able to learn good database design, normalisation etc.
IMO Access only teaches you to use Access and hides the database
programming from you (in the same way that FrontPage hid (and failed to
provide) good HTML coding practice.

Install a free WAMP stack and get a good book/online course and 'get your
hands dirty' you will learn far more that way. Oh, and it will not be
'easier' but it will be far more educational!

Just my two-penn'orth

Nil wrote:
On 17 Dec 2010, Heather Mills wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

Exactly. I already have various lists and tables in Word and
Excel. I am frustrated by the lack of tools (or the contortions
needed to make them work) to do even moderately complicated
searches (like a summary table of what I gave each person for
Christmas for the last 5 years).

I really need a database. I've been putting off the learning
curve, but it's time to just do it.

I don't think Access's learning curve is that great, especially if
you're mainly going to work with single flat databases and you're not
going to be delving too far into relational (multiple, tied-together)
databases, or it's macro and programming languages, or interface
design. For simple databases, it's pretty easy to do complex and/or
searches with its query-by-example interface. The concepts can be a
little foreign to some people, but once you get them down it all
becomes fairly straightforward.

I'm talking about Access 2003. I get the impression that the program
has changed quite a bit since then - I hope it's even easier for the
novice to use, and I also hope the complex under-the-hood stuff is
still accessible.

But I would guess there are some simpler database programs out there, but I
haven't looked into it. I guess no one has any specific program
suggestions in that regard? I still remember DBASE II - that one seemed
pretty basic and simple, but then again, that's going back to the days of
DOS.

On 17 Dec 2010, "Bill in Co" wrote
in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

But I would guess there are some simpler database programs out
there, but I haven't looked into it. I guess no one has any
specific program suggestions in that regard? I still remember
DBASE II - that one seemed pretty basic and simple, but then
again, that's going back to the days of DOS.

I hope there are some simpler and less expensive database programs out
there, because they can be so very useful, but I don't know
specifically of any, since I haven't been in the market for one for a
long time. I like Access because I think it's pretty easy to grasp for
doing the simpler stuff, but it has a lot of capability if you want to
take it farther. Of course, you pay quite a few $s for the potential
depth.

I used dBase quite a bit back in the day, and it was regarded as the
first "simple" to use database. It actually had a pretty steep leaning
curve, especially since back then there was nothing similar to compare
it to. Later on I used to recommend a database program called Alpha
Four that used dBase's file format but had a character mode "graphical"
interface that made it quite easy to use. Very well-designed program. I
just checked and I see the company is still alive - their current
product is "Alpha Five" and is marketed more as a tool for building web
database applications, although they also tout themselves as a
competitor to Access. Also priced like Access.

I also liked Paradox. It had a rather unique interface that was a
little hard to grasp, but very capable once you got the hang of it.

You could put together a great database for free using mySQL or another
free database server, and there must be some free graphical front ends
to make it all easier to use for those who don't want to learn SQL
syntax.

Nil wrote:
On 17 Dec 2010, "Bill in Co" wrote
in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

But I would guess there are some simpler database programs out
there, but I haven't looked into it. I guess no one has any
specific program suggestions in that regard? I still remember
DBASE II - that one seemed pretty basic and simple, but then
again, that's going back to the days of DOS.

I hope there are some simpler and less expensive database programs out
there, because they can be so very useful, but I don't know
specifically of any, since I haven't been in the market for one for a
long time. I like Access because I think it's pretty easy to grasp for
doing the simpler stuff, but it has a lot of capability if you want to
take it farther. Of course, you pay quite a few $s for the potential
depth.

I used dBase quite a bit back in the day, and it was regarded as the
first "simple" to use database. It actually had a pretty steep leaning
curve, especially since back then there was nothing similar to compare
it to. Later on I used to recommend a database program called Alpha
Four that used dBase's file format but had a character mode "graphical"
interface that made it quite easy to use. Very well-designed program. I
just checked and I see the company is still alive - their current
product is "Alpha Five" and is marketed more as a tool for building web
database applications, although they also tout themselves as a
competitor to Access. Also priced like Access.

I also liked Paradox. It had a rather unique interface that was a
little hard to grasp, but very capable once you got the hang of it.

You could put together a great database for free using mySQL or another
free database server, and there must be some free graphical front ends
to make it all easier to use for those who don't want to learn SQL
syntax.

Remember PC-FILE? A shareware, easy to use, but only flat-file, database
program? I just recalled it now.

And PC-Write, another oldie but goodie. :-)