It seems I have run afoul of an unfixable and acknowledged bug in my
beloved access 97 which has no workaround other than to upgrade.
Current supported upgrades are 2002 and 2003.
2003 appears to use lots 'o system resources, so I am wondering if I am
best to go with the older (2002) version.
Any opinions out here? In particular, which version more likely to make
the conversion of the 97 databases the least painful? Both upgrades
cost the same...
Thanks for any thoughts. 20 1976
Stephan Golux <st*****@nospam .com.goluxstudi o.invalid> wrote in
news:xd******** ********@newsre ad2.news.atl.ea rthlink.net: It seems I have run afoul of an unfixable and acknowledged bug in my beloved access 97 which has no workaround other than to upgrade.
Perhaps, you should tell us about the bug. There are work-arounds for
almost all bugs.
Current supported upgrades are 2002 and 2003.
2003 appears to use lots 'o system resources, so I am wondering if I am best to go with the older (2002) version.
Any opinions out here? In particular, which version more likely to make the conversion of the 97 databases the least painful? Both upgrades cost the same...
Is it possible that you will want in the future some feature that is
available in 2003 but not in 2002?
Software becomes obsolete very quickly. Why start out that way?
--
Lyle
(for e-mail refer to http://ffdba.com/contacts.htm)
Lyle Fairfield wrote:
<snip> Perhaps, you should tell us about the bug. There are work-arounds for almost all bugs.
I have previously written about the bug in this newsgroup - see the
thread titled "Exporting Reports to RTF format causes unexpected
truncation". I have since found a microsoft knowledgebase article that
describes the bug, namely article #288877. URL: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;288877
<snip>
Is it possible that you will want in the future some feature that is available in 2003 but not in 2002?
Software becomes obsolete very quickly. Why start out that way?
Quite possible, but I am also sensitive to feature and resource bloat.
Access 2003 (by microsoft's published specifications) requires double
the memory of 2002, so I partly want to know if it is worth it. I have
also heard rumors that performance is worse in 2003. Also, since I need
to use a number of databases that were created in 97, I am curious about
whether there are backward compatibility issues I need to be concerned
about.
"Stephan Golux" <st*****@nospam .com.goluxstudi o.invalid> wrote in message
news:X%******** ********@newsre ad2.news.atl.ea rthlink.net... Lyle Fairfield wrote: <snip> Perhaps, you should tell us about the bug. There are work-arounds for almost all bugs.
I have previously written about the bug in this newsgroup - see the thread titled "Exporting Reports to RTF format causes unexpected truncation". I have since found a microsoft knowledgebase article that describes the bug, namely article #288877. URL:
The first thing I would do before proceeding is finding someone with a newer
version to absolutely confirm that the RTF problems are solved in those
versions. I am not so sure that they are.
--
I don't check the Email account attached
to this message. Send instead to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Stephan Golux <st*****@nospam .com.goluxstudi o.invalid> wrote in news:X%
wd************* *@newsread2.new s.atl.earthlink .net: Lyle Fairfield wrote: <snip> Perhaps, you should tell us about the bug. There are work-arounds for almost all bugs.
I have previously written about the bug in this newsgroup - see the thread titled "Exporting Reports to RTF format causes unexpected truncation". I have since found a microsoft knowledgebase article that describes the bug, namely article #288877. URL:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;288877
<snip>
Is it possible that you will want in the future some feature that is available in 2003 but not in 2002?
Software becomes obsolete very quickly. Why start out that way?
Quite possible, but I am also sensitive to feature and resource bloat. Access 2003 (by microsoft's published specifications) requires double the memory of 2002, so I partly want to know if it is worth it. I have also heard rumors that performance is worse in 2003. Also, since I need to use a number of databases that were created in 97, I am curious about whether there are backward compatibility issues I need to be concerned about.
I can't imagine buying a new version of Access just to address this problem.
Let's suppose the KB article you cite is correct (they aren't correct very
often but we always have to allow for that possibility). Surely it would be
simple enough to remove double hard returns from the memo field in the
AfterUpdate event of the form where the data are entered, or in a clean-up
type query run before the report is generated.
But, of course, the KB article may be wrong, or not pertinent to your
problem. It's not wonderfully difficult to create a MS-Word file that
contains fields, to fill these fields from MS-Access (I prefer to have the
MS-Word file look for a text file where its field entries reside, and to
create that text file from MS-Access, (automation is another route), and to
send that MS-Word file, or those MS-Word files to whomever, however. And MS-
Access Files can look much better than RTF files, which are quite limited.
Of course, Access97 is a very antiquated program, and you might find many
useful capabilities in a newer version. I use 2000, 2002 and 2003 with no
problems and no noticeable slowness.
--
Lyle
(for e-mail refer to http://ffdba.com/contacts.htm)
First off, let me say your points are great, and welcome. Just to specify:
Lyle Fairfield wrote: I can't imagine buying a new version of Access just to address this problem.
Let's suppose the KB article you cite is correct (they aren't correct very often but we always have to allow for that possibility). Surely it would be simple enough to remove double hard returns from the memo field in the AfterUpdate event of the form where the data are entered, or in a clean-up type query run before the report is generated.
The problem is that the application in question is for people who WANT
that double hard return in the field, and want it to be propagated
appropriately. So removing them is not an option! But, of course, the KB article may be wrong, or not pertinent to your problem. It's not wonderfully difficult to create a MS-Word file that contains fields, to fill these fields from MS-Access (I prefer to have the MS-Word file look for a text file where its field entries reside, and to create that text file from MS-Access, (automation is another route), and to send that MS-Word file, or those MS-Word files to whomever, however. And MS- Access Files can look much better than RTF files, which are quite limited.
Hmmm... this is an interesting idea, but I would love to pick your
brains for how to apply it in my case.
Basically this application is used by stage managers and directors and
assistant directors in theatre and film who need to create work notes
that are then sent via email or fax to the people who need them.
Essentially, the user types in the notes, and assignes any given note to
any given number of roles, where any number of people may be affiliated
with a given role. Then, once the notes are entered, the user hits a
dingle "distribute " button, and reports are generated for each
individual person, broken down by roles, and then emailed or faxed to
each person automatically. There could be several hundred people and
several hundred roles.
Do you see a way to automate something like this using MS-Word in the
way you describe? I feel like the driving engine needs to be Access in
this case, but perhaps you have experience that would allow me to do
something smarter and cleverer.
Thanks again!
-s
Rick Brandt wrote: The first thing I would do before proceeding is finding someone with a newer version to absolutely confirm that the RTF problems are solved in those versions. I am not so sure that they are.
Very good point. Thank you.
-s
Hi Stephan,
I haven't read your previous post or looked at the KB article either, so if
what I'm about to suggest is just plain stupid, I apologize in advance.
The implication seems to be that you want to be able to share reports with
other users who may not have Access installed.
Unless your users *have to have* the ability to edit your report, is it
possible that using the freely-distributable Access Snapshot Report Viewer
might solve your problem? http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=acc97
PS. I am also stubbornly "sticking with" Access97. I do have AccessXP, too,
but I just can't seem to invest the time it takes to make the switch. :-(
Another reason for me not to switch is that most of my "clientele" are
automotive repair shops running Pentium / PII / PIII (NOT the newest
equipment) Funny how those guys will spend $6-8,000 on a new "school-bus
yellow" Snap-On (TM) toolbox (and thousands more to fill it with Snap-On
tools), but only $300 for a "good used" PC <grin>
--
HTH,
Don
=============== ==============
Use My*****@Telus.N et for e-mail
Disclaimer:
Professional PartsPerson
Amateur Database Programmer {:o)
I'm an Access97 user, so all posted code
samples are also Access97- based
unless otherwise noted.
=============== ==============
"Stephan Golux" <st*****@nospam .com.goluxstudi o.invalid> wrote in message
news:X%******** ********@newsre ad2.news.atl.ea rthlink.net... Lyle Fairfield wrote: <snip> Perhaps, you should tell us about the bug. There are work-arounds for almost all bugs.
I have previously written about the bug in this newsgroup - see the thread titled "Exporting Reports to RTF format causes unexpected truncation". I have since found a microsoft knowledgebase article that describes the bug, namely article #288877. URL:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;288877
<snip>
Is it possible that you will want in the future some feature that is available in 2003 but not in 2002?
Software becomes obsolete very quickly. Why start out that way?
Quite possible, but I am also sensitive to feature and resource bloat. Access 2003 (by microsoft's published specifications) requires double the memory of 2002, so I partly want to know if it is worth it. I have also heard rumors that performance is worse in 2003. Also, since I need to use a number of databases that were created in 97, I am curious about whether there are backward compatibility issues I need to be concerned about.
"Don Leverton" <le************ ****@telusplane t.net> wrote in
news:hwydc.2567 3$J56.13818@edt nps89: Hi Stephan,
I haven't read your previous post or looked at the KB article either, so if what I'm about to suggest is just plain stupid, I apologize in advance.
The implication seems to be that you want to be able to share reports with other users who may not have Access installed. Unless your users *have to have* the ability to edit your report, is it possible that using the freely-distributable Access Snapshot Report Viewer might solve your problem?
http://support.microsoft.com/default...348&Product=ac c97
I'm a big fan of the Snapshot Viewer; when it came out I though faxes were
history, but it never seemed to catch on with people. Regardless, if
Stephan could persuade his users to install this, (and it's very simple to
do so) then that would be a much simpler and cleaner solution than messing
with MS-Word files.
--
Lyle
(for e-mail refer to http://ffdba.com/contacts.htm)
Hi Don - a very creative idea, and many thanks for it. Unfortunately,
to the best of my knowledge this viewer is not available for the
macintosh or for linux. RTF files can be viewed on all those various
machines.
Thanks!
-s
Don Leverton wrote: Hi Stephan,
I haven't read your previous post or looked at the KB article either, so if what I'm about to suggest is just plain stupid, I apologize in advance.
The implication seems to be that you want to be able to share reports with other users who may not have Access installed. Unless your users *have to have* the ability to edit your report, is it possible that using the freely-distributable Access Snapshot Report Viewer might solve your problem?
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=acc97
PS. I am also stubbornly "sticking with" Access97. I do have AccessXP, too, but I just can't seem to invest the time it takes to make the switch. :-(
Another reason for me not to switch is that most of my "clientele" are automotive repair shops running Pentium / PII / PIII (NOT the newest equipment) Funny how those guys will spend $6-8,000 on a new "school-bus yellow" Snap-On (TM) toolbox (and thousands more to fill it with Snap-On tools), but only $300 for a "good used" PC <grin> This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics |
by: Ray |
last post by:
I bought/installed the upgrade to Visual Studio .Net
Professional 2003 (from 2002). I was surprised that it
did not appear to uninstall (or overlay) my old version
(2002) of Visual Studio .Net Professional. There are two
sets of Framework and Visual Studio on both the "conrol
panel/program add-remove" and two sets of menu's off
the "start/programs". I'd just uninstall the old (as the
new has "2003" off of everything) ... but it just...
|
by: Stephan Golux |
last post by:
It seems I have run afoul of an unfixable and acknowledged bug in my
beloved access 97 which has no workaround other than to upgrade.
Current supported upgrades are 2002 and 2003.
2003 appears to use lots 'o system resources, so I am wondering if I am
best to go with the older (2002) version.
Any opinions out here? In particular, which version more likely to make
the conversion of the 97 databases the least painful? Both upgrades
|
by: Lauren Wilson |
last post by:
Hi Folks,
I have a widely distributed Access 200 Application. I must retain my
ability to support users who are still on Access 2000 and Access 2000
Runtime. However I also need to upgrade my development environment to
Office 2003 Professional.
My question is: Where can I find a comprehensive description of the
known issues that will affect my ability to do all of the above after
I upgrade my own development environment to Office...
|
by: Robert Misiak |
last post by:
Is there a VS.NET Academic 2002 -> 2003 upgrade? I haven't been able to
find one anywhere, in fact I have yet to come across a standalone VS.NET
2003, my university bookstore still carries 2002. Did MS ever release these
products?
Robert
|
by: Tim |
last post by:
Is there a way to upgrade from Visual C++ Net 2002 to
Visual C++ Net 2003? The 2002 version does not provide
a Windows Forms Designer. I can't find any upgrade package
on Microsoft's website.
Thanks,
Tim
| |
by: Herfried K. Wagner [MVP] |
last post by:
Hello,
There are often questions in this newsgroup posted by VS.NET 2002 users.
VS.NET 2002 is "out of date", its successor is VS.NET 2003.
There is a special ("cheap") upgrade offer available for $29 US. This offer
is open only until September 30, 2003. You will get more information about
this offer here:
Visual Studio .NET 2003 Upgrade Offer
|
by: MadCrazyNewbie |
last post by:
Hey Group,
I have a VB6 Project im trying to use with VB.Net, It lets me open it and
the Upgrade Wizard Launches I click next Select EXE and Click Next Again,
the it errors with:
"Upgrade Failed: Exception Error Occurred: Invalid System Configuration
(Unable to Locate Micorosoft.VisualBasic.UpgradeExtensions.dll. Please
re-run Setup and try again."
|
by: Liz |
last post by:
I'm going to be installing VS 2003 over my existing VS; are there any
factors/considerations/precautions I should be aware of before doing so ?
will the older VS be removed automatically or is it an option ?
Thanks ...
btw, I'm also going to install Office 2003; anyone know if my Outlook email
accounts and other preferences/settings/etc will be preserved ? I can't
seem to find an answer to this anywhere even though it seems an easy...
|
by: Andy |
last post by:
Hi
As I try to learn VB programing I've been playing around with sourcecode
from projects hosted on sourceforge. If I open this code in VB 2005 (it is
originally developed in VB 2003), it will automatically upgrade to VB 2005?
/Andy
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed.
This is as boiled down as I can make it.
Here is my compilation command:
g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp
Here is the code in...
| |
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth.
The Art of Business Website Design
Your website is...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own....
Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules.
He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms.
Adolph will...
|
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
| |
by: muto222 |
last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
| |