You are correct in that a database file may contain more rich data that CSV. I think it is open to debate, however, whether a closed format like MDB is easier for the end user, over something open like SQLite.
I'd estimate that 90% of the Windows computers out there that are used for 'everyday' work have Access on them. For those users, opening the file is basically double-clicking it.
For that to work with sqlite databases, one still needs to install a GUI tool first, hope that it associates the right extension with the sqlite file you have, and then get over the database-centric user interface that all of them have.
Look, I'm not saying that mdb is better than sqlite. But I am saying that the notion that the 'openness' of sqlite somehow makes it easier for regular users to open them is a crock.
Or maybe we can talk about if using sqlite databases in simple, 'script-like' applications is easier than doing the same with mdb/Access databases. That is more nuanced and depends on what environment you want to talk from etc. But that goes far beyond the definition of a 'user' as in the use case of the OP (a large student body to whom exam results need to be communicated).
I would estimate the number of Windows computers used for "everyday work" which have MS Acces on them is more like 15%. That is just in my personal experience though.
OK fair enough, I don't have anything more substantial than a wild-assed guess to back up my 90% claim. I'd still say that an mdb file is closer to the everyday experience of the average Windows user than an sqlite file is. And even if they're equally difficult to open, the 'openness' of the sqlite data format is still of no importance whatsoever to the average user, which is the original claim I was opposing.
