By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
429,499 Members | 829 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 429,499 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Access 2003 vs. 2002

P: n/a
I am trying to decide whether or not to upgrade to Access 2003 from
2002 but I'm having a difficult time weighing the options. Has anyone
already upgraded to Access 2003? Is there much difference between the
two versions or did Microsoft just apply a new GUI to 2002? I would
like to develop databases and applications with Access that are ready
to use as a web site backend. Is 2003 better suited to do this rather
than 2002?

Thanks!
Nov 12 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
4 Replies


P: n/a
As I understand it, there is no difference between the table format for 2003
vs 2002.
I would think that would be all you'd be using for a web site backend.

You should be aware, however, that Access is not often recommended for a
website backend because it doesn't scale well or easily support large
numbers of simultaneous "hits".

- Turtle

"Bob S." <rt*****@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2d**************************@posting.google.c om...
I am trying to decide whether or not to upgrade to Access 2003 from
2002 but I'm having a difficult time weighing the options. Has anyone
already upgraded to Access 2003? Is there much difference between the
two versions or did Microsoft just apply a new GUI to 2002? I would
like to develop databases and applications with Access that are ready
to use as a web site backend. Is 2003 better suited to do this rather
than 2002?

Thanks!

Nov 12 '05 #2

P: n/a
The enhancements in Access 2003 were primarily for the corporate customer to
improve collaboration, XML exporting, and interoperability with tools such
as SharePoint -- none of which seem pertinent to what you describe.

Access, strictly speaking, is the UI and development tool -- Jet is one
database engine, and Microsoft SQL Server Desktop Edition (MSDE) is the
other that comes with it. Either of the database engines is suitable for
low-traffic websites, but full Microsoft SQL Server or another server
database would be needed for a high-traffic website.

The Access UI and development tool can be used to organize the tables in
either database engine for use in a website, but cannot create a website
application. In this regard, it can be used to create "Data Access Pages"
but they are sufficiently limited (e.g., Internet Information Server
webserver and Internet Explorer browser only) that you see them, generally,
only on Intranets where the environment is closely controlled.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP

"Bob S." <rt*****@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2d**************************@posting.google.c om...
I am trying to decide whether or not to upgrade to Access 2003 from
2002 but I'm having a difficult time weighing the options. Has anyone
already upgraded to Access 2003? Is there much difference between the
two versions or did Microsoft just apply a new GUI to 2002? I would
like to develop databases and applications with Access that are ready
to use as a web site backend. Is 2003 better suited to do this rather
than 2002?

Thanks!

Nov 12 '05 #3

P: n/a
"MacDermott" <ma********@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<yu******************@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net>...
As I understand it, there is no difference between the table format for 2003
vs 2002.
I would think that would be all you'd be using for a web site backend.

You should be aware, however, that Access is not often recommended for a
website backend because it doesn't scale well or easily support large
numbers of simultaneous "hits".

- Turtle

"Bob S." <rt*****@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2d**************************@posting.google.c om...
I am trying to decide whether or not to upgrade to Access 2003 from
2002 but I'm having a difficult time weighing the options. Has anyone
already upgraded to Access 2003? Is there much difference between the
two versions or did Microsoft just apply a new GUI to 2002? I would
like to develop databases and applications with Access that are ready
to use as a web site backend. Is 2003 better suited to do this rather
than 2002?

Thanks!


Thanks for the insight-I appreciate the help!

-Bob S.
Nov 12 '05 #4

P: n/a
"Larry Linson" <bo*****@localhost.not> wrote in message news:<pF******************@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>.. .
The enhancements in Access 2003 were primarily for the corporate customer to
improve collaboration, XML exporting, and interoperability with tools such
as SharePoint -- none of which seem pertinent to what you describe.

Access, strictly speaking, is the UI and development tool -- Jet is one
database engine, and Microsoft SQL Server Desktop Edition (MSDE) is the
other that comes with it. Either of the database engines is suitable for
low-traffic websites, but full Microsoft SQL Server or another server
database would be needed for a high-traffic website.

The Access UI and development tool can be used to organize the tables in
either database engine for use in a website, but cannot create a website
application. In this regard, it can be used to create "Data Access Pages"
but they are sufficiently limited (e.g., Internet Information Server
webserver and Internet Explorer browser only) that you see them, generally,
only on Intranets where the environment is closely controlled.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP

"Bob S." <rt*****@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2d**************************@posting.google.c om...
I am trying to decide whether or not to upgrade to Access 2003 from
2002 but I'm having a difficult time weighing the options. Has anyone
already upgraded to Access 2003? Is there much difference between the
two versions or did Microsoft just apply a new GUI to 2002? I would
like to develop databases and applications with Access that are ready
to use as a web site backend. Is 2003 better suited to do this rather
than 2002?

Thanks!

Thanks a lot for the advice. Your detailed reponse was very helpful.

-Bob S.
Nov 12 '05 #5

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.