Thinking of upgrading runtime from Access 97, any comparisons / tips?

>Hello All,
>
>I have a major application for quoting and invoicing that is written in
>Access 97 (both front and back ends). I have a user base of over 300
>customers, and currently I don't require that they have Access 97, as I use
>the access 97 runtime scripts from Sagekey software. The main problems I've
>seen with Access 97 are the built in e-mail support for sending reports.
>Unless a user uses the MS Outlook 2000/XP method, they have to go with
>either an .RTF (which doesn't include graphics), or a Snapshot (which they
>don't like to do).
>
>After catching up with some of the posts here, it sounds like the .RTF issue
>still exists in Access 2003. This is ok, as long as 2003 will finally
>support the use of Outlook Express, using your own defined attachments, and
>not requiring a full copy of Outlook 2000/XP or later, for attachments. I
>guess I really have 3 options:
>
>1) Stick with Access 97, and buy the updated Access 97 runtime scripts from
>Sagekey that now supports Windows Vista installs. Buy an e-mail add-in
>program that supports build in e-mails, .pdf attachments, etc.
>
>2) Buy Office Developer 2003 (not sure thist can still be purchased
>anywhere), and new Access 2003 runtime scripts.
>
>3) Buy the latest Office Developer 2007.
>
>I do believe the e-mail handling, with lack of attachments such as .pdf or
>.xls, in the default ms mapi functions, is the big drawback of access 97.
>The positives of staying with 97 would be the reduced size of the download,
>and possibly faster running speed of 97 (as Microsoft software evolves, it
>generally requires faster hardware, etc.)
>
>I'm sure I'm missing many key features that have been added to the 2003 and
>2007 versions of office, but it's really hard to find a link comparing the
>feature sets of all versions of office. Can anyone offer suggestions?
>
>Many, many thanks!
>
>Andy
>

The scripts in the developer ed are just wrappers for installing the
runtime version of access on the user's machine and copying in the
database - if you have the inclination, you can script this yourself
with vbscript, or a bat file... whatever you're comforable with. There
are also some very good third party applications for packing your mde.
So don't let this be a deal breaker.
>
Access 2003 doesn't really add much over A2k - Most access aps
developed in 2003 are actually compiled in the 2000 format anyway. In
fact, I avoid 2003 where possible because of the crazy macro security
warnings that plague users. Unless you are willing to shell out an
annual subscription for a security cert I'd avoid 2003 - there are
work arounds, but they involve messing with security settings - which
is never polite. I have heard that some third party mde packaging
solutions get around this - but I don't know how, so can't comment
here.
>
Don't know anything about 2007, sorry!
>
Also, the blurb is that you can easily upgrade existing aps from one
version to another and run 2000 on 2003 etc... not always the case -
and I have a recycling bin full of corrupted dbs to testify!
>
My advice: If it ain't broke...
>