ODBC vs OLE DB ??

Here is an except from the book "SQL Server 2000 Weekend Crash Course"
OSQL-A command-line utility used to connect to SQL Server and execute
Transact-SQL statements (covered in Session 8). The results of the executed
commands will be displayed in the DOS console window. OSQL uses the ODBC
(Open Database Connectivity) interface to connect to SQL Server.
ISQL-Uses the DB-Library interface to communicate with SQL Server. It is a
database-specific interface and is not portable. In addition to this, ISQL
does not support many of the new features in Microsoft SQL Server 2000.
Another Excerpt: In SQL Server 2000, all utilities except isql use the ODBC
API and the SQL Server ODBC Driver.
The implication being that ODBC is the way forward. I read another
newsgroup article that said the recommend way forward is in fact OLE DB and
not ODBC. I have come from Sybase where I have been using Ct-Lib almost
exclusively and not needed anything like OLE DB. What advantage does it
offer over ODBC? Is it genuinly easy to get up and running in a matter of
hours, or am I going to spend a week trying to understand it, and another
week getting it to function. Does any existing coding have to change?
Whats my upside/downside for switching to OLE-DB?
Thanks
What should drive this decision is your choice of client application.
ODBC is no longer cutting-edge, having been superceded by OLE DB
(ADO). This is what you'd use with a VB6 or older COM client. However,
if you are working in any of the .NET technologies, then you'll want
to use ADO.NET (coding in either C# or VB.NET) using the SqlClient
provider.
--Mary
On Wed, 19 May 2004 20:20:14 +0200, "Grant Reid"
<grant.reid@.telefonica(dot)net> wrote:

>Here is an except from the book "SQL Server 2000 Weekend Crash Course"
>OSQL-A command-line utility used to connect to SQL Server and execute
>Transact-SQL statements (covered in Session 8). The results of the executed
>commands will be displayed in the DOS console window. OSQL uses the ODBC
>(Open Database Connectivity) interface to connect to SQL Server.
>ISQL-Uses the DB-Library interface to communicate with SQL Server. It is a
>database-specific interface and is not portable. In addition to this, ISQL
>does not support many of the new features in Microsoft SQL Server 2000.
>Another Excerpt: In SQL Server 2000, all utilities except isql use the ODBC
>API and the SQL Server ODBC Driver.
>The implication being that ODBC is the way forward. I read another
>newsgroup article that said the recommend way forward is in fact OLE DB and
>not ODBC. I have come from Sybase where I have been using Ct-Lib almost
>exclusively and not needed anything like OLE DB. What advantage does it
>offer over ODBC? Is it genuinly easy to get up and running in a matter of
>hours, or am I going to spend a week trying to understand it, and another
>week getting it to function. Does any existing coding have to change?
>Whats my upside/downside for switching to OLE-DB?
>Thanks
>