By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
435,454 Members | 3,209 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 435,454 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Life with Different Versions of Access

P: n/a
After reading and experiencing the phenomenon of installing MS Office
2000 on a system that already has MS Office 97, or for that matter
just Access 97 Runtime, I saw the ugliness that ensues. If one elects
the standard installation, then Office 2000 deletes a large percentage
of the older files. Of course, if one happens to choose Custom
installation and elects not to uninstall prior versions, then things
are happier. Yes, the archives are nearly replete with related
information, but is it possible that something new has emerged on this
subject?

I have done my own custom installation scripts of Access 97 Runtime
and place the files in a new, separate folder under Program Files. If
installed after Office 2000, there is no problem, except that each
takes a bit of time to reregister itself at startup. I believe that I
read somewhere about modifying the .srg files for Access 97 to
overcome this issue. Is this true? And what steps are needed to
accomplish it?

Also, does installing Office XP and/or Office 2003 onto a system that
has a prior version (well, specifically 97) cause the same havoc as
Office 2000 noted above? Or was Microsoft more circumspect with the
development and deployment of the later two versions?

Not that I want to augment the finances of SageKey, but I have read
that their Wise installation scripts for Access 97 have been designed
to prevent later versions of Office from removing earlier ones. This
is an interesting twist, but how did they do it? Is there a way to
conceal the identity of the older Office files? Has anyone insight
into this matter? Although logic may not be in an abundance at
Microsoft, why would they not have taken the reverse approach to this
issue with the installation of later Office versions - default of not
removing and optional custom of removing? Or if the later version,
after finding the older version in a folder other than Program
Files\Microsoft Office, does not remove?

Most Access developers might remark that they have control over their
installations, and therefore, the above issue is not significant.
However, for those of us where that method does not apply, then what
options or workarounds do we have, besides the pricey SageKey scripts
(not to mention the Wise installer) and the basic just disclose it
method?

Thanks for your anticipated answers and opinions. Dalan
Nov 12 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
4 Replies


P: n/a
Dalan, see what michka has to say on the coexistence of A97 and 2000 at:
http://www.trigeminal.com/usenet/usenet019.asp?1033

The later versions are similar.

--
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.

"Dalan" <ot***@safe-mail.net> wrote in message
news:50**************************@posting.google.c om...
After reading and experiencing the phenomenon of installing MS Office
2000 on a system that already has MS Office 97, or for that matter
just Access 97 Runtime, I saw the ugliness that ensues. If one elects
the standard installation, then Office 2000 deletes a large percentage
of the older files. Of course, if one happens to choose Custom
installation and elects not to uninstall prior versions, then things
are happier. Yes, the archives are nearly replete with related
information, but is it possible that something new has emerged on this
subject?

I have done my own custom installation scripts of Access 97 Runtime
and place the files in a new, separate folder under Program Files. If
installed after Office 2000, there is no problem, except that each
takes a bit of time to reregister itself at startup. I believe that I
read somewhere about modifying the .srg files for Access 97 to
overcome this issue. Is this true? And what steps are needed to
accomplish it?

Also, does installing Office XP and/or Office 2003 onto a system that
has a prior version (well, specifically 97) cause the same havoc as
Office 2000 noted above? Or was Microsoft more circumspect with the
development and deployment of the later two versions?

Not that I want to augment the finances of SageKey, but I have read
that their Wise installation scripts for Access 97 have been designed
to prevent later versions of Office from removing earlier ones. This
is an interesting twist, but how did they do it? Is there a way to
conceal the identity of the older Office files? Has anyone insight
into this matter? Although logic may not be in an abundance at
Microsoft, why would they not have taken the reverse approach to this
issue with the installation of later Office versions - default of not
removing and optional custom of removing? Or if the later version,
after finding the older version in a folder other than Program
Files\Microsoft Office, does not remove?

Most Access developers might remark that they have control over their
installations, and therefore, the above issue is not significant.
However, for those of us where that method does not apply, then what
options or workarounds do we have, besides the pricey SageKey scripts
(not to mention the Wise installer) and the basic just disclose it
method?

Thanks for your anticipated answers and opinions. Dalan

Nov 12 '05 #2

P: n/a
Thanks Allen for the tip, but I have read the same article twice
before. I haven't attempted modifying the .srg files yet. So, no new
news on the subject - hey? You said "similar" regarding later versions
of MS Access and their installation protocols. So yes, if a custom
installation is not selected, then the older files are removed? And
what is so unique about SageKey's scripts that they can automatically
prevent this occurrence? Any additional insight will be appreciated.
Dalan
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalid> wrote in message news:<3f**********************@freenews.iinet.net. au>...
Dalan, see what michka has to say on the coexistence of A97 and 2000 at:
http://www.trigeminal.com/usenet/usenet019.asp?1033

The later versions are similar.

--
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.

"Dalan" <ot***@safe-mail.net> wrote in message
news:50**************************@posting.google.c om...
After reading and experiencing the phenomenon of installing MS Office
2000 on a system that already has MS Office 97, or for that matter
just Access 97 Runtime, I saw the ugliness that ensues. If one elects
the standard installation, then Office 2000 deletes a large percentage
of the older files. Of course, if one happens to choose Custom
installation and elects not to uninstall prior versions, then things
are happier. Yes, the archives are nearly replete with related
information, but is it possible that something new has emerged on this
subject?

I have done my own custom installation scripts of Access 97 Runtime
and place the files in a new, separate folder under Program Files. If
installed after Office 2000, there is no problem, except that each
takes a bit of time to reregister itself at startup. I believe that I
read somewhere about modifying the .srg files for Access 97 to
overcome this issue. Is this true? And what steps are needed to
accomplish it?

Also, does installing Office XP and/or Office 2003 onto a system that
has a prior version (well, specifically 97) cause the same havoc as
Office 2000 noted above? Or was Microsoft more circumspect with the
development and deployment of the later two versions?

Not that I want to augment the finances of SageKey, but I have read
that their Wise installation scripts for Access 97 have been designed
to prevent later versions of Office from removing earlier ones. This
is an interesting twist, but how did they do it? Is there a way to
conceal the identity of the older Office files? Has anyone insight
into this matter? Although logic may not be in an abundance at
Microsoft, why would they not have taken the reverse approach to this
issue with the installation of later Office versions - default of not
removing and optional custom of removing? Or if the later version,
after finding the older version in a folder other than Program
Files\Microsoft Office, does not remove?

Most Access developers might remark that they have control over their
installations, and therefore, the above issue is not significant.
However, for those of us where that method does not apply, then what
options or workarounds do we have, besides the pricey SageKey scripts
(not to mention the Wise installer) and the basic just disclose it
method?

Thanks for your anticipated answers and opinions. Dalan

Nov 12 '05 #3

P: n/a
Yes, later versions also remove previous Office products unless you do a
Custom install.

Can't comment on SageKey: not something I use.

--
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.

"Dalan" <ot***@safe-mail.net> wrote in message
news:50**************************@posting.google.c om...
Thanks Allen for the tip, but I have read the same article twice
before. I haven't attempted modifying the .srg files yet. So, no new
news on the subject - hey? You said "similar" regarding later versions
of MS Access and their installation protocols. So yes, if a custom
installation is not selected, then the older files are removed? And
what is so unique about SageKey's scripts that they can automatically
prevent this occurrence? Any additional insight will be appreciated.
Dalan
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalid> wrote in message

news:<3f**********************@freenews.iinet.net. au>...
Dalan, see what michka has to say on the coexistence of A97 and 2000 at:
http://www.trigeminal.com/usenet/usenet019.asp?1033

The later versions are similar.

--
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.

"Dalan" <ot***@safe-mail.net> wrote in message
news:50**************************@posting.google.c om...
After reading and experiencing the phenomenon of installing MS Office
2000 on a system that already has MS Office 97, or for that matter
just Access 97 Runtime, I saw the ugliness that ensues. If one elects
the standard installation, then Office 2000 deletes a large percentage
of the older files. Of course, if one happens to choose Custom
installation and elects not to uninstall prior versions, then things
are happier. Yes, the archives are nearly replete with related
information, but is it possible that something new has emerged on this
subject?

I have done my own custom installation scripts of Access 97 Runtime
and place the files in a new, separate folder under Program Files. If
installed after Office 2000, there is no problem, except that each
takes a bit of time to reregister itself at startup. I believe that I
read somewhere about modifying the .srg files for Access 97 to
overcome this issue. Is this true? And what steps are needed to
accomplish it?

Also, does installing Office XP and/or Office 2003 onto a system that
has a prior version (well, specifically 97) cause the same havoc as
Office 2000 noted above? Or was Microsoft more circumspect with the
development and deployment of the later two versions?

Not that I want to augment the finances of SageKey, but I have read
that their Wise installation scripts for Access 97 have been designed
to prevent later versions of Office from removing earlier ones. This
is an interesting twist, but how did they do it? Is there a way to
conceal the identity of the older Office files? Has anyone insight
into this matter? Although logic may not be in an abundance at
Microsoft, why would they not have taken the reverse approach to this
issue with the installation of later Office versions - default of not
removing and optional custom of removing? Or if the later version,
after finding the older version in a folder other than Program
Files\Microsoft Office, does not remove?

Most Access developers might remark that they have control over their
installations, and therefore, the above issue is not significant.
However, for those of us where that method does not apply, then what
options or workarounds do we have, besides the pricey SageKey scripts
(not to mention the Wise installer) and the basic just disclose it
method?

Thanks for your anticipated answers and opinions. Dalan

Nov 12 '05 #4

P: n/a
I believe SageKeys scripts are for Wise Installer and InstallShield. I know
of them primarily in regard to installing runtime support, although one of
my colleagues used his own Wise scripts to install Access 2.0 remotely.

If you simply mean the installation of retail Access, I have, on this
machine, Access 97, Access 2002, and Access 2003 all happily coexisting.
Yes, each was installed into a separte folder, and in each case, I told the
install not to replace the previous version. As best I remember, I installed
them in chronological order, but I might have installed Access 97 after one
of the others. If you get the "no license" message, take a look at Article
141373 in the Knowledge Base at http://support.microsoft.com.

I don't know if there is a SageKey newsgroup, but that would be a good
source for detail information, or SageKey's website. One would think they
would be prompt to answer questions from a potential customer.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP

"Dalan" <ot***@safe-mail.net> wrote in message
news:50**************************@posting.google.c om...
Thanks Allen for the tip, but I have read the same article twice
before. I haven't attempted modifying the .srg files yet. So, no new
news on the subject - hey? You said "similar" regarding later versions
of MS Access and their installation protocols. So yes, if a custom
installation is not selected, then the older files are removed? And
what is so unique about SageKey's scripts that they can automatically
prevent this occurrence? Any additional insight will be appreciated.
Dalan
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalid> wrote in message

news:<3f**********************@freenews.iinet.net. au>...
Dalan, see what michka has to say on the coexistence of A97 and 2000 at:
http://www.trigeminal.com/usenet/usenet019.asp?1033

The later versions are similar.

--
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.

"Dalan" <ot***@safe-mail.net> wrote in message
news:50**************************@posting.google.c om...
After reading and experiencing the phenomenon of installing MS Office
2000 on a system that already has MS Office 97, or for that matter
just Access 97 Runtime, I saw the ugliness that ensues. If one elects
the standard installation, then Office 2000 deletes a large percentage
of the older files. Of course, if one happens to choose Custom
installation and elects not to uninstall prior versions, then things
are happier. Yes, the archives are nearly replete with related
information, but is it possible that something new has emerged on this
subject?

I have done my own custom installation scripts of Access 97 Runtime
and place the files in a new, separate folder under Program Files. If
installed after Office 2000, there is no problem, except that each
takes a bit of time to reregister itself at startup. I believe that I
read somewhere about modifying the .srg files for Access 97 to
overcome this issue. Is this true? And what steps are needed to
accomplish it?

Also, does installing Office XP and/or Office 2003 onto a system that
has a prior version (well, specifically 97) cause the same havoc as
Office 2000 noted above? Or was Microsoft more circumspect with the
development and deployment of the later two versions?

Not that I want to augment the finances of SageKey, but I have read
that their Wise installation scripts for Access 97 have been designed
to prevent later versions of Office from removing earlier ones. This
is an interesting twist, but how did they do it? Is there a way to
conceal the identity of the older Office files? Has anyone insight
into this matter? Although logic may not be in an abundance at
Microsoft, why would they not have taken the reverse approach to this
issue with the installation of later Office versions - default of not
removing and optional custom of removing? Or if the later version,
after finding the older version in a folder other than Program
Files\Microsoft Office, does not remove?

Most Access developers might remark that they have control over their
installations, and therefore, the above issue is not significant.
However, for those of us where that method does not apply, then what
options or workarounds do we have, besides the pricey SageKey scripts
(not to mention the Wise installer) and the basic just disclose it
method?

Thanks for your anticipated answers and opinions. Dalan

Nov 12 '05 #5

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.