As George has said, SQL Server is completely free to install and use and bundling it with Access should not imply any increase in cost for anyone. A valid point however is that installing it by default wouldn't be appropriate for users who already had SQL Server. There ought to be an option to use an existing copy as well as to install a new one.
KVD, maybe you could elaborate on what you mean by not being able to afford this option. SQL Server is free to download and use. If Microsoft integrated it properly with Access then using Access with SQL Server wouldn't cost any more than using Access with Jet/ACE. This would be a major upgrade in Access capabilities because people could seamlessly take advantage of SQL Server features at no extra cost.
ADP was the wrong solution to the wrong problem. I don't want to bring back ADP, I want to see Access upgraded so that it can take full advantage of SQL Server to the point where SQL Server becomes a suitable replacement for ACE.
Alphonse, SQL Express is installed in many multi-user environments and other Microsoft products install it by default. Installing Jet/ACE makes much less sense in a multi-user environment which is why I'm suggesting SQL Express instead. If the user already has a SQL Server installed then the install process could give them the option to use that instead of SQL Express.nto shared this idea ·
Perhaps the proposal here is to make SQL Server the default engine instead of ACE. I have suggested the same thing: https://access.uservoice.com/forums/319956-access-desktop/suggestions/10626486-better-integration-with-sql-server