Access 97 also has html capability.  I recently had a chance to mess around
with Filemaker Pro and found it incredibly cumbersome and inadequate.  As a
professional software developer I have to say the Access provides me with
the more power and flexibility than any other desktop relational database
system.  Also, if needed Access database easily scale up to MS SQL Server
databases which makes it great for a growing organization.  Access uses
Visual Basic for Applications as it's underlying programming language.  Now
that hundreds of software companies are licensing VBA in their own programs,
it makes it even easier to integrate other applications with your databases.

Like Paul, I am not obligated to Microsoft in any way.  However, I am
Microsoft Certified and I do prefer their products, but, my preferences are
based more on performance and usability more than brand names.

Gary Acord
Acord Information Management
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Muir <[log in to unmask]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.museum-l
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, March 30, 1998 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: computer databases


>I have been using MS Access for several years but was just introduced to
>FileMaker Pro and have to concede that it is _far_ superior to Access.
>It is cross-platform, has none of the bugs that come when re-naming
>fields in Access and actually publishes information in html for instant
>and _interactive_ web pages.  Don't overlook FileMaker when examining
>your options.  More information at http://www.filemaker.com
>BTW, I am in no way connected or obligated to FileMaker, Inc. (formerly
>Claris, Inc.).
>
>Paul Muir  [log in to unmask]
>http://www.mobilexhibit.com
>
>Gary Acord <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> If you are intending to create and maintain your own database I strongly
>> recommend Microsoft Access.  It is by far the best desktop relational
>> database tool available today.
>>
>Bob Oldham wrote:
>> >
>> >Right now we're using Paradox, which has been OK but can't handle the
>> >size fields we need and can't do inventory maintenance. It also runs
>> >under DOS, which is a bit of a pain.
>