By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,967 Members | 1,690 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,967 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

VB.net Access97

P: n/a
I still use Access97 for countless legacy apps, and no later editions
of Access due to writing some of my front-end interfaces written in VB
6.0, and still loyal to A97. I purchased VB.net 2003 and was wondering
if I could still use my trusty A97 for back-end and some front-end
apps.
Thanks! Brian

Nov 13 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
9 Replies


P: n/a
Yes.

Nov 13 '05 #2

P: n/a
"Chuck Grimsby" <c.*******@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:11**********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:
Yes.


Er, um, of what use is this post, Chuck?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #3

P: n/a
He asked "I purchased VB.net 2003 and was wondering if I could still
use my trusty A97 for back-end and some front-end apps", and I
answered.

Where's the problem, David?

Nov 13 '05 #4

P: n/a
"Chuck Grimsby" <c.*******@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:11*********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com:
He asked "I purchased VB.net 2003 and was wondering if I could
still use my trusty A97 for back-end and some front-end apps", and
I answered.

Where's the problem, David?


You are cutting the context in your replies, so there's no way to
know what you're answering without checking Google Groups. Depending
on thread context for the meaning of your answers seems to me to be
very unwise because you have no guarantee that the readers of your
reply will be reading the message in the context that supplies the
information needed to give your reply meaning.

Also keep in mind that the post you replied to may not be available
to the reader of your reply, either because the article has expired
on your news server (or never arrived in the first place), or
because it never made it to Google Groups (or had X-NoArchive: Yes
in the header, so it disappears from Google Groups after 10 days or
so).

Posts that answer a question without repeating enough of the
question to know what's being asked are completely worthless.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #5

P: n/a
I agree.

--
[OO=00=OO]
Nov 13 '05 #6

P: n/a
For what it's worth....

When I posted that reply, I was using Google Groups, as I am with this
post.

The interface Google Groups has doesn't give you options on what text
from the message you are replying to is included.

Nov 13 '05 #7

P: n/a
"Chuck Grimsby" <c.*******@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:11**********************@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com:
For what it's worth....

When I posted that reply, I was using Google Groups, as I am with
this post.

The interface Google Groups has doesn't give you options on what
text from the message you are replying to is included.


You can't copy the post and paste it into the reply?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
Nov 13 '05 #8

P: n/a
On 8 Jun 2005 03:02:14 -0700, "Chuck Grimsby"
<c.*******@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
For what it's worth....

When I posted that reply, I was using Google Groups, as I am with this
post.

The interface Google Groups has doesn't give you options on what text
from the message you are replying to is included.


Sure it does. Pilfered from another newsgroup:

"Don't hit on 'reply' to post a followup. Instead hit 'show options'
right besides the headers. This opens up a menu of options. Select
'Reply' from this menu. Now a window opens where you can enter and
edit the new text. Most important difference: this window shows a
quote of the article you are responding to."

mike

Nov 13 '05 #9

P: n/a
Oh, ok. Someday I'll have to remember to try that...

<Grin>

Nov 13 '05 #10

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.