473,695 Members | 1,560 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Differences between Access 97 and Access 2000/2003

Hi All,

Our company is migrating from Windows NT to XP and in the process from
Access 97 to Access 2003.
Due to the phased rollout we are faced with a situation where some users are
still on NT while others have been fully upgraded, but all users need to use
the same Access databases.
At first we tried just opening the Access 97 databases with XP but we were
worried that some of the less computer-literate employees may click "yes" on
the "Do you want to convert this database to the latest version" prompt.
The solution we have come up with is to create an exact duplicate of the
database in XP but with all the Tables removed and relinked to the 97
version.
This solution is working well on the whole but there have been a couple of
instances where that database has required a repair.

The main problem we are still having is that my colleagues and I can no
longer make any changes to the database while there are any users in. Is
this a setting which we can change?
For instance, on 97 you could alter a form in the live database and then
save the altered form......XP doesn't seem to allow you to do that.

Any help would be massively appreciated.

Thanks in Advance,

John
Nov 13 '05 #1
11 6475
John, as you found, Access 2000 and later do a monolithic save, and there is
no setting to override this.

For other suggestions on adapting to the newer versions, see:
Converting from Access 97 to 2000, 2002 or 2003
at:
http://allenbrowne.com/ser-48.html
(The monolithic save issue is listed as #6 under 'Usability issues'.)

--
Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.

"John Ortt" <Jo******@Idont wantspamsonoret urnaddress.com> wrote in message
news:42******** **@glkas0286.gr eenlnk.net...

Our company is migrating from Windows NT to XP and in the process from
Access 97 to Access 2003.
Due to the phased rollout we are faced with a situation where some users
are
still on NT while others have been fully upgraded, but all users need to
use
the same Access databases.
At first we tried just opening the Access 97 databases with XP but we were
worried that some of the less computer-literate employees may click "yes"
on
the "Do you want to convert this database to the latest version" prompt.
The solution we have come up with is to create an exact duplicate of the
database in XP but with all the Tables removed and relinked to the 97
version.
This solution is working well on the whole but there have been a couple of
instances where that database has required a repair.

The main problem we are still having is that my colleagues and I can no
longer make any changes to the database while there are any users in. Is
this a setting which we can change?
For instance, on 97 you could alter a form in the live database and then
save the altered form......XP doesn't seem to allow you to do that.

Any help would be massively appreciated.

Thanks in Advance,

John

Nov 13 '05 #2
Thanks Allen,

No the answer I wanted but still very helpful :)
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@Se eSig.Invalid> wrote in message
news:42******** *************** @per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au ...
John, as you found, Access 2000 and later do a monolithic save, and there is no setting to override this.

For other suggestions on adapting to the newer versions, see:
Converting from Access 97 to 2000, 2002 or 2003
at:
http://allenbrowne.com/ser-48.html
(The monolithic save issue is listed as #6 under 'Usability issues'.)

--
Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.


Nov 13 '05 #3
"John Ortt" <Jo******@Idont wantspamsonoret urnaddress.com> wrote in message
news:42******** **@glkas0286.gr eenlnk.net...
Hi All,

Our company is migrating from Windows NT to XP and in the process from
Access 97 to Access 2003.
I wonder which company that is.
Due to the phased rollout we are faced with a situation where some users
are
still on NT while others have been fully upgraded, but all users need to
use
the same Access databases.
At first we tried just opening the Access 97 databases with XP but we were
worried that some of the less computer-literate employees may click "yes"
on
the "Do you want to convert this database to the latest version" prompt.
The solution we have come up with is to create an exact duplicate of the
database in XP but with all the Tables removed and relinked to the 97
version.
Seems reasonable.
This solution is working well on the whole but there have been a couple of
instances where that database has required a repair.
I'm not sure that is related to A2k3 linking to an A97 BE.
The main problem we are still having is that my colleagues and I can no
longer make any changes to the database while there are any users in. Is
this a setting which we can change?
For instance, on 97 you could alter a form in the live database and then
save the altered form......XP doesn't seem to allow you to do that.


This is very dangerous practice, far more likely a source of corruption than
linking different versions. You should never attempt to change a FE in the
production environment, you should always work on a development copy and
deploy it to production once testing is complete. You should also ensure
that all users have their own copies of the FE. This would also minimise
the risk of unwanted conversions taking place. Applying user-level security
would stop it in its tracks but is a more long-term solution.

HTH - Keith.
www.keithwilby.com

Nov 13 '05 #4
"Keith" <ke*********@ba eAWAYWITHITsyst ems.com> wrote in
news:42******** **@glkas0286.gr eenlnk.net:
This is very dangerous practice, far more likely a source of
corruption than linking different versions. You should never
attempt to change a FE in the production environment, you should
always work on a development copy and deploy it to production once
testing is complete. You should also ensure that all users have
their own copies of the FE. This would also minimise the risk of
unwanted conversions taking place. Applying user-level security
would stop it in its tracks but is a more long-term solution.


Secondly, each user should have their own copy of the front end, so
if they convert, it won't affect anybody but the single user.

This was true *before* Access 2000, of course.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #5
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xn******** *************** ***********@216 .196.97.142...
"Keith" <ke*********@ba eAWAYWITHITsyst ems.com> wrote in
news:42******** **@glkas0286.gr eenlnk.net:
You should also ensure that all users have
their own copies of the FE. This would also minimise the risk of
unwanted conversions taking place.


Secondly, each user should have their own copy of the front end, so
if they convert, it won't affect anybody but the single user.

Erm, didn't I already say that David? ;-)
Nov 13 '05 #6
Keith wrote:
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xn******** *************** ***********@216 .196.97.142...
"Keith" <ke*********@ba eAWAYWITHITsyst ems.com> wrote in
news:42****** ****@glkas0286. greenlnk.net:

You should also ensure that all users have
their own copies of the FE. This would also minimise the risk of
unwanted conversions taking place.


Secondly, each user should have their own copy of the front end, so
if they convert, it won't affect anybody but the single user.


Erm, didn't I already say that David? ;-)


Can I just add that all users should have their own copy of the front end.
;-)
--
[OO=00=OO]
Nov 13 '05 #7
Keith wrote:
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xn******** *************** ***********@216 .196.97.142...
"Keith" <ke*********@ba eAWAYWITHITsyst ems.com> wrote in
news:42****** ****@glkas0286. greenlnk.net:

You should also ensure that all users have
their own copies of the FE. This would also minimise the risk of
unwanted conversions taking place.


Secondly, each user should have their own copy of the front end, so
if they convert, it won't affect anybody but the single user.


Erm, didn't I already say that David? ;-)


Can I just add that all users should have their own copy of the front end.
;-)
--
[OO=00=OO]
Nov 13 '05 #8
"Trevor Best" <no****@besty.o rg.uk> wrote in message
news:42******** *************@n ews.zen.co.uk.. .
Secondly, each user should have their own copy of the front end, so
if they convert, it won't affect anybody but the single user.


Erm, didn't I already say that David? ;-)


Can I just add that all users should have their own copy of the front end.
;-)

Can I just say this is the first time I've been on television?
;-p
Nov 13 '05 #9
"Trevor Best" <no****@besty.o rg.uk> wrote in message
news:42******** *************@n ews.zen.co.uk.. .
Secondly, each user should have their own copy of the front end, so
if they convert, it won't affect anybody but the single user.


Erm, didn't I already say that David? ;-)


Can I just add that all users should have their own copy of the front end.
;-)

Can I just say this is the first time I've been on television?
;-p
Nov 13 '05 #10

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

6
3117
by: Martin Meyer im Hagen | last post by:
Hello, I've got installed Win 2003 SBS Premium with the SQL Server 2000 on a server machine. It works almost fine, except the application which uses the SQL Server. The main part of the application runs (since the last update) fine, but other tools of that application (database import and the database manager for check and rebuild) doesn't. They hang up or kill the database. Our software developer says that these problems are in...
1
3599
by: John Smith | last post by:
My wife is working on developing a small Access 97 application. While we have newer versions of Access available, she's using 97 because that's what was installed on the machine (Win 2000). Are there significant improvements in the newer versions, especially with respect to query wizards and form design/building to make it worthwhile to switch versions while she develops this small application - which will be used only by one person. ...
2
2332
by: Jeff | last post by:
Does anyone know of any potential problems running a 2000 database with 2003? Also, what about installing all other Office products as 2003 versions but leaving Access as 2002 running a 2000 database? Why you ask! A client has a 2000 database. Currently using 2000 runtime for most employees to work with database. A couple use 2003 to use database, no problems. They have a mix of versions of other products such as Word, Excel - 97,...
47
4525
by: ship | last post by:
Hi We need some advice: We are thinking of upgrading our Access database from Access 2000 to Access 2004. How stable is MS Office 2003? (particularly Access 2003). We are just a small company and this is a big decision for us(!) It's not just the money it's committing to an new version of Access!
1
1045
by: H.C.Eng | last post by:
Is there a document that lists the differences between IIS in Windows 2000 and IIS in Windows Server 2003? I am talking about gotcahs for people with asp pages written in Windows 2000 and now running them on Windows Server 2003. For example, I now have a asp file with: <!-- #include file= "../routines.asp" --> that works perfectly fine in Windows 2000 and now in Windows Server 2003 it complains The Include file '../routines.asp'...
49
3220
by: Mell via AccessMonster.com | last post by:
I created databases on Access 2003 and I want to deploy them to users. My code was also done using 2003. If they have Ms Access 2000 or higher, will they be able to use these dbs with all code, etc? Please explain -- Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com
3
2339
by: banba_ca | last post by:
When I create a new db from the main Access window or thru Vb (set newdb = ...) I always end up with Access 2000 file format. I would like to get 2002 - 2003 file format. The reason is that when I try to link from a 2002 - 2003 db to a 2000 db, the Jet engine complains that it can't find the table in the target (2000) database. And no, I can't convert on the fly. Any suggestoins would be appreciated. ....Banba
3
2739
by: NEWSGROUPS | last post by:
I am in the midst of trying to convert about 25 Access 2000 to Access 2003. The new environment consists of Office/Access 2003 and Outlook 2003. When converting the back ends I have no problems. When converting the front ends I get the following issues and error. If I try to import all the objects into a blank Access 2003 shell I get a missing reference error for Outlook 2000, Excel 2000, and Word 2000 or after importing all the objects...
2
6303
by: Michael R | last post by:
Hello. I've been writting an Access app on office 2003 for sometime, and couldn't find any info on the net on what are the differences between the 2 formats, and why should I use Access 2002-2003 in favour of Access 2000. Help would be appriciated.
0
8565
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
0
8977
jinu1996
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...
0
7656
agi2029
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...
1
6488
isladogs
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...
0
4339
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
0
4577
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
1
2997
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
2
2269
muto222
by: muto222 | last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
3
1971
bsmnconsultancy
by: bsmnconsultancy | last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.