Posted by Stephen Howe on 09/03/07 14:54

>> Can you get classic ADO and SQLOLEDB in combination not to do that?
>
> Yes, don't use it.
>
> Seriously, it's is very difficult to get ADO only what it supposed to
> and not a lot more.

Well it is a stupid state of affairs that Microsoft invest 7 years in ADO -
and even now we dont fully know what it does - there is a heck of a lot
undocumented or poorly documented.

I am amazingly tired of playing the game, "ooohh, you have discovered some
flaws in our existing mature technology - why dont you shift to our brand
technology which does not have that flaw?".
Because it is only a matter of time before someone discovers that ADO.NET
has flaws and how long will it be before MS declares ADO.NET and .NET
legacy, they are bored with it, and start creating other new "cool
technology"? And then we are back to the same cycle. It is a crap state of
affairs.

There are limited ways of accessing databases - rowsets, SP's, input/output
parameters - why cant they sort it out so that if there are, say, 6
different methods, say, of retrieving data - we all know the overhead of
using each method - nothing is left undocumented - we all know under what
circumstances SET FMTONLY ON, NO_BROWSETABLE (which I have seen before - 4
years ago) are issued and why.

Does anyone really believe with ODBC, DAO, RDO, ADO, ADO.NET - each
generation has been an improvement?
They are all interfaces on the same set of database technology - which does
not change.

Stephen Howe

[Back to original message]