In the end (i feel) – databases are for data processing, spreadsheets are for data analysis.

I use SQL Server to get the data down to what i need – then Excel to do the reports etc.

Here is my problem with Excel…every college in the world teaches every student how to 'use' Excel to do everything, without teaching them anything about data. So in the real business world, you wind up with Excel-Hell because people try to solve everything with Excel, and Excel doesn't enforce any data integrity at all. I'm not lobbying for everyone to be and Access or database guru, just for people to realize that there IS a valid reason to use a database (most business cases that I can think of) and a reason to use Excel (primarily accounting but there are some other valid reasons too).

In the end, if you have a need to do something, and you have a method or process in one or the other, fine and dandy, but be open to other options…

Now, back to my original post…I could have elaborated a bit and stipulated that if I had a million rows in a spreadsheet on a regular basis and had to regularly grab data from it, I would slit my wrists…

You will now be returned to your regular programming…and thanks for listening…;^)

You'll drive Excel, and I'll drive Access.

As to the column increase I LOVE THIS!! Had a performance management file where there needed to be a column for every day of the year. 365 days > 256 columns so I had to have one file for the first half of the year and a second file for the second half. Invariably at mid-year, no matter how ofter I explained why there had to be two separte spreadsheets, I would get the questions of: "Why can't I see everything? Did you delete it?" Which would translate in the pointy-hair boss's mind to: "Oh, this is just a smoke-screen and she's not doing her job of daily tracking." ARGH!! So for all the haters, and any Microsoft developers out there considering decreasing the number of columns in 2010, stop the hate.

Joking aside, I'm calling bullsh*t that you can do it in Access faster.

Open the text file in Excel, go through the OpenText wizard. Sort on IP address. Delete all rows that don't have the IP address you want.

Now do the same in Access. Faster? OK, now get the count of the number of records, email to that number to someone, and throw everything away. Yep, you only needed the count. In Excel, I hit Ctl+w and say 'no' to saving. What you do in Access? Close the database without saving? I don't think so.

If I may be so bold, Excel is the right tool for the above contrived job. The number of rows is only one factor in deciding which tool you use, and it's only the most important factor when you have more rows than the tool can handle.

I like Access, but I'm not going to put scaffolding around my house to clean the gutters. I'll just use a ladder, thanks.

I am surprised at how many people have commented that they love the increased rows because they can now create pivot tables on large data dumps " 800k – 900k rows".

Again, a broader skill-set would help here. I would find it far easier to connect a pivot table to extermal data sources than to actually bring the data into Excel.

I cringe when people say "I hate Access" . Not because I'm gay for Access. Because limiting yourslef to a single tool (Excel) can limit options that can potentially help you do things in more productive ways.

Again, I don't think the increased limits are "bad". But of the all the tools I am comfortable with using, Excel is the least adept at handling and analyzing half a million rows.