By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
434,985 Members | 2,884 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 434,985 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Loading 2 versions of runtime

P: n/a
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar

Jul 10 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
28 Replies


P: n/a
2 versions of Access can not exist on the same O/S, the only way you're
going to do that is with a dual-boot computer. The DLLs for the 2
versions of Access are completely different and will not interract with
each other.
larpup wrote:
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar
Jul 10 '06 #2

P: n/a

ManningFan a scris:
2 versions of Access can not exist on the same O/S, the only way you're
going to do that is with a dual-boot computer. The DLLs for the 2
versions of Access are completely different and will not interract with
each other.
larpup wrote:
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar
False!

You can have two versions (or more) of runtime on the same box, on the
same OS.
Just make sure that the path to msaccess for each shortcut point to the
right 'msaccess.exe' and of course you have installed them in different
folders.

Example:
' "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Art\Office10\msaccess.exe "
"c:\MyXP_DB.mde" ' for Access XP .mde or .mdb file and
' "C:\MyProgram\Runtime\Office\msaccess.exe " "c:\My97_DB.mde" ' for
Access 97 .mde or .mdb file.
The same goes for other versions of runtime (A2k, A2k3) or for other
combinations of runtime.
Cheers!

Sebastian

Jul 10 '06 #3

P: n/a

ManningFan a scris:
2 versions of Access can not exist on the same O/S, the only way you're
going to do that is with a dual-boot computer. The DLLs for the 2
versions of Access are completely different and will not interract with
each other.
larpup wrote:
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar
False!

You can have two versions (or more) of runtime on the same box, on the
same OS.
Just make sure that the path to msaccess for each shortcut point to the
right 'msaccess.exe' and of course you have installed them in different
folders.

Example:
' "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Art\Office10\msaccess.exe "
"c:\MyXP_DB.mde" ' for Access XP .mde or .mdb file and
' "C:\MyProgram\Runtime\Office\msaccess.exe " "c:\My97_DB.mde" ' for
Access 97 .mde or .mdb file.
The same goes for other versions of runtime (A2k, A2k3) or for other
combinations of runtime.
Cheers!

Sebastian

Jul 10 '06 #4

P: n/a
Rubbish, I have in the past had Access2, Access97, Access2k, AccessXp and
Access2003 all loaded on the same PC under the same OS at the same time.
--

Terry Kreft
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
2 versions of Access can not exist on the same O/S, the only way you're
going to do that is with a dual-boot computer. The DLLs for the 2
versions of Access are completely different and will not interract with
each other.
larpup wrote:
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar

Jul 10 '06 #5

P: n/a
You have to load them in sequence (A97 followed by A2k3) and they have to be
installed in different folders.

You then have to ensure that each mdb/mde uses the correct version, which
you can do by using shortcuts.

--

Terry Kreft
"larpup" <la****@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar

Jul 10 '06 #6

P: n/a
And how do you prevent the OCXs in Windows/System32 from being
overwritten with each install?

I've worked on networks for several years and have never seen it done,
at least not without clusterphuxing your machine. To have 5 versions
of Access on the same machine is preposterous, and I apologize for this
but I think you're full of crap.
Terry Kreft wrote:
You have to load them in sequence (A97 followed by A2k3) and they have to be
installed in different folders.

You then have to ensure that each mdb/mde uses the correct version, which
you can do by using shortcuts.

--

Terry Kreft
"larpup" <la****@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar
Jul 10 '06 #7

P: n/a
Ummm... Terry Kreft has forgotten more about Access then you and I know put
together. Further, in this particular case, he is 100% correct.
I've always had 3 to 4 versions on my machines without any complications. So
do all of the Access MVP's that I know. So do most of the Access developers
out there. Everyone it seems, except for you, is capable of following the
simple instructions that Terry laid out.

--

Stephen Lebans
http://www.lebans.com
Access Code, Tips and Tricks
Please respond only to the newsgroups so everyone can benefit.
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
And how do you prevent the OCXs in Windows/System32 from being
overwritten with each install?

I've worked on networks for several years and have never seen it done,
at least not without clusterphuxing your machine. To have 5 versions
of Access on the same machine is preposterous, and I apologize for this
but I think you're full of crap.
Terry Kreft wrote:
>You have to load them in sequence (A97 followed by A2k3) and they have to
be
installed in different folders.

You then have to ensure that each mdb/mde uses the correct version, which
you can do by using shortcuts.

--

Terry Kreft
"larpup" <la****@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googleg roups.com...
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar

Jul 10 '06 #8

P: n/a
Thank you very much for responding. I will ensure paths are correct and
get back.

Regards,

Lar
Stephen Lebans wrote:
Ummm... Terry Kreft has forgotten more about Access then you and I know put
together. Further, in this particular case, he is 100% correct.
I've always had 3 to 4 versions on my machines without any complications. So
do all of the Access MVP's that I know. So do most of the Access developers
out there. Everyone it seems, except for you, is capable of following the
simple instructions that Terry laid out.

--

Stephen Lebans
http://www.lebans.com
Access Code, Tips and Tricks
Please respond only to the newsgroups so everyone can benefit.
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
And how do you prevent the OCXs in Windows/System32 from being
overwritten with each install?

I've worked on networks for several years and have never seen it done,
at least not without clusterphuxing your machine. To have 5 versions
of Access on the same machine is preposterous, and I apologize for this
but I think you're full of crap.
Terry Kreft wrote:
You have to load them in sequence (A97 followed by A2k3) and they have to
be
installed in different folders.

You then have to ensure that each mdb/mde uses the correct version, which
you can do by using shortcuts.

--

Terry Kreft
"larpup" <la****@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar
Jul 10 '06 #9

P: n/a
Well, I'm sorry that in your many years of experience you appear to have
failed to achieve any level of competence in installing different versions
of Access on one machine under one OS.

A simple review of this problem in Google would have shown you that not only
is it possible, it is achieved by many people (try searching on the phrase
"Different versions of access on one machine").

I think I should point out that it is particularly gutless to apologise
before abusing someone. Luckily in this case having demonstrated to the
world that you are incompetent, gutless, rude and ill-informed I believe
that most people will be able to decide the level of confidence they should
have in any further posts of yours and will be able to make an informed
decision as to whether they need to spend any of their valuable time reading
anything you post.

--

Terry Kreft
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
And how do you prevent the OCXs in Windows/System32 from being
overwritten with each install?

I've worked on networks for several years and have never seen it done,
at least not without clusterphuxing your machine. To have 5 versions
of Access on the same machine is preposterous, and I apologize for this
but I think you're full of crap.
Terry Kreft wrote:
You have to load them in sequence (A97 followed by A2k3) and they have
to be
installed in different folders.

You then have to ensure that each mdb/mde uses the correct version,
which
you can do by using shortcuts.

--

Terry Kreft
"larpup" <la****@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.
>
I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.
>
I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.
>
1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.
>
I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97 and
it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?
>
Any advise is greatly appreciated.
>
Regards,
>
Lar
>

Jul 11 '06 #10

P: n/a
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
but I think you're full of crap.
Ummm, I think we all know who's FOC here.

Keith.
Jul 11 '06 #11

P: n/a
Guess I peed in the wrong person's cheerios... :o/ You're right, I'll
go kill myself now because you feel my posts are worthless.

Terry Kreft wrote:
I think I should point out that it is particularly gutless to apologise
before abusing someone. Luckily in this case having demonstrated to the
world that you are incompetent, gutless, rude and ill-informed I believe
that most people will be able to decide the level of confidence they should
have in any further posts of yours and will be able to make an informed
decision as to whether they need to spend any of their valuable time reading
anything you post.

--

Terry Kreft
Jul 12 '06 #12

P: n/a
"ManningFan" wrote
Guess I peed in the wrong person's cheerios... :o/
You're right, I'll go kill myself now because you
feel my posts are worthless.
I'll observe a moment of silence.

Seems I recently had to correct one of your very-confidently-stated
responses that was dead wrong, too. I've only got three versions of Access
installed on this machine, but like others who've responded, I have had a
few more than that on some other machines in the past.

Perhaps you can still be confident, but cut back a little on the arrogance,
at least to the point where you aren't quite so ready to accuse people who
really know what they are talking about of being FOC because their
(perfectly correct) answers don't agree with what you think.

Larry

Jul 13 '06 #13

P: n/a
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
Guess I peed in the wrong person's cheerios... :o/ You're right, I'll
go kill myself now because you feel my posts are worthless.
Have you thought of changing your handle to "PC Datasheet"?
Jul 13 '06 #14

P: n/a

I have disagreed with lots and lots of people in he NGs, some of those
people I respected before the fact, some I later went on to respect (and
some were irredeemable idiots <g>).

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing (obviously) bur it's best to be
reasonably certain of your ground before doing so and to be honest resorting
to insults normally makes most people highly suspicious of the strength of
your arguments and, even worse, usually diverts the thread into less than
helpfull paths.

I don't want you to go away, I'd like you to stay here and engage in
providing accurate answers to peoples questions and argue/debate points
which you disagree with.

There's a lot to learn for _everyone_ in here that's the continuing
attraction of participating
--

Terry Kreft
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
Guess I peed in the wrong person's cheerios... :o/ You're right, I'll
go kill myself now because you feel my posts are worthless.

Terry Kreft wrote:
I think I should point out that it is particularly gutless to apologise
before abusing someone. Luckily in this case having demonstrated to the
world that you are incompetent, gutless, rude and ill-informed I believe
that most people will be able to decide the level of confidence they
should
have in any further posts of yours and will be able to make an informed
decision as to whether they need to spend any of their valuable time
reading
anything you post.

--

Terry Kreft

Jul 13 '06 #15

P: n/a
DFS
ManningFan wrote:
And how do you prevent the OCXs in Windows/System32 from being
overwritten with each install?

I've worked on networks for several years and have never seen it done,
at least not without clusterphuxing your machine. To have 5 versions
of Access on the same machine is preposterous, and I apologize for
this but I think you're full of crap.
He's not full of crap. For a long time I ran Access97 and 2000 together.
Then I added 2003 and had all 3 versions going.

It looks like this in Program Files

http://www.angelfire.com/planet/dfs0...Access_fun.PNG


Terry Kreft wrote:
>You have to load them in sequence (A97 followed by A2k3) and they
have to be installed in different folders.

You then have to ensure that each mdb/mde uses the correct version,
which you can do by using shortcuts.

--

Terry Kreft
"larpup" <la****@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@h48g2000cwc.googleg roups.com...
>>I have computers setup with A97 runtime with mde's. Work perfectly.

I've written an app in 2003 and purchased the Developer extensions.
When I load A2003 runtime with my app on a computer that has A97
runtime, I cannot open the A 97 mde's.

I was under the impression that the developer extensionsl allow for
having both runtimes on a computer.

1. A97 Runtime loaded first
2. A2003 runtime loaded second.

I've tested the a2003 mde in runtime mode on computer without A97
and it works perfectly.
Is there anything I can do to have both runtime versions run on one
computer with two different mde's?

Any advise is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Lar

Jul 13 '06 #16

P: n/a
Larry -
I've never seen it done on a Novell Network. If you can point out a
primer on doing this across a Novell Network I will eat my words in
public, on the White House steps while wearing a purple tutu and
makeup.

So far as I know, Novell will not allow more than one version of
Access to run on the same machine, because it recreates the registry on
each load.

Larry Linson wrote:
>
I'll observe a moment of silence.

Seems I recently had to correct one of your very-confidently-stated
responses that was dead wrong, too. I've only got three versions of Access
installed on this machine, but like others who've responded, I have had a
few more than that on some other machines in the past.

Perhaps you can still be confident, but cut back a little on the arrogance,
at least to the point where you aren't quite so ready to accuse people who
really know what they are talking about of being FOC because their
(perfectly correct) answers don't agree with what you think.

Larry
Jul 13 '06 #17

P: n/a
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com:
I've never seen it done on a Novell Network. If you can point
out a
primer on doing this across a Novell Network I will eat my words
in public, on the White House steps while wearing a purple tutu
and makeup.

So far as I know, Novell will not allow more than one version of
Access to run on the same machine, because it recreates the
registry on each load.
What in the *hell* are you talking about? Access is only every
installed on a workstation, not on a server, and there's no such
thing as a Novell workstation. The only thing you put on a server is
the MDB data file, and that is accessed by workstations through the
file system, so installation of Jet or Access is COMPLETELY
IRRELEVANT FOR A NOVELL SERVER.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Jul 13 '06 #18

P: n/a
* ManningFan:
Larry -
I've never seen it done on a Novell Network. If you can point out a
primer on doing this across a Novell Network I will eat my words in
public, on the White House steps while wearing a purple tutu and
makeup.

So far as I know, Novell will not allow more than one version of
Access to run on the same machine, because it recreates the registry on
each load.

Larry Linson wrote:
>I'll observe a moment of silence.

Seems I recently had to correct one of your very-confidently-stated
responses that was dead wrong, too. I've only got three versions of Access
installed on this machine, but like others who've responded, I have had a
few more than that on some other machines in the past.

Perhaps you can still be confident, but cut back a little on the arrogance,
at least to the point where you aren't quite so ready to accuse people who
really know what they are talking about of being FOC because their
(perfectly correct) answers don't agree with what you think.

Larry
There are a great many people on this NG that have multiple versions of
Access installed on their systems without problems. If you prefer not
to believe them, perhaps you should give it a try yourself rather than
prolonging this pissing contest.

--
Randy Harris
tech at promail dot com
I'm pretty sure I know everything that I can remember.
Jul 14 '06 #19

P: n/a
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
Larry -
I've never seen it done on a Novell Network.
I'm not surprised. I've never seen a camel in Blackburn town centre either.
I wonder why.
Jul 14 '06 #20

P: n/a
That's obviously because you walk around with your eyes shut Keith, I
personally have seen two camels, three llamas and a bandicoot in Blackburn
town centre, mind you, when I started taking the pills again I couldn't seem
to find them, or indeed Blackburn town centre.

<g>

--

Terry Kreft
"Keith Wilby" <he**@there.comwrote in message
news:44**********@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
Larry -
I've never seen it done on a Novell Network.

I'm not surprised. I've never seen a camel in Blackburn town centre
either.
I wonder why.


Jul 14 '06 #21

P: n/a
"Terry Kreft" <te*********@mps.co.ukwrote in message
news:54********************@karoo.co.uk...
That's obviously because you walk around with your eyes shut Keith, I
personally have seen two camels, three llamas and a bandicoot in Blackburn
town centre, mind you, when I started taking the pills again I couldn't
seem
to find them, or indeed Blackburn town centre.
Perhaps you'd fallen into one of those 4000 holes ;-)

Keith.
Jul 14 '06 #22

P: n/a
LOL!

Good link !
--

Terry Kreft
"Keith Wilby" <he**@there.comwrote in message
news:44**********@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
"Terry Kreft" <te*********@mps.co.ukwrote in message
news:54********************@karoo.co.uk...
That's obviously because you walk around with your eyes shut Keith, I
personally have seen two camels, three llamas and a bandicoot in
Blackburn
town centre, mind you, when I started taking the pills again I couldn't
seem
to find them, or indeed Blackburn town centre.

Perhaps you'd fallen into one of those 4000 holes ;-)

Keith.


Jul 14 '06 #23

P: n/a
On a Novell network the server controls the content of the
workstations. This is how you allow some users to use some programs
and other users to NOT use those programs, and how you limit users from
installing "sanctioned" programs only. Just because you don't
understand a Novell network doesn't give you the right to get all
uppity about it.

Oh wait. Now I sound like you.

David W. Fenton wrote:
What in the *hell* are you talking about? Access is only every
installed on a workstation, not on a server, and there's no such
thing as a Novell workstation. The only thing you put on a server is
the MDB data file, and that is accessed by workstations through the
file system, so installation of Jet or Access is COMPLETELY
IRRELEVANT FOR A NOVELL SERVER.
Jul 14 '06 #24

P: n/a
ManningFan wrote:
On a Novell network the server controls the content of the
workstations. This is how you allow some users to use some programs
and other users to NOT use those programs, and how you limit users
from installing "sanctioned" programs only. Just because you don't
understand a Novell network doesn't give you the right to get all
uppity about it.

Oh wait. Now I sound like you.
None of your (out of the blue) Novell network behavior statements alter the fact
that your original comment...

2 versions of Access can not exist on the same O/S, the only way you're
going to do that is with a dual-boot computer. The DLLs for the 2
versions of Access are completely different and will not interract with
each other.

....is a load of rubbish on all but this very specific Novell environment which
you only injected as a lame attempt to salvage an incorrect position.

--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Jul 14 '06 #25

P: n/a
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in
news:11**********************@75g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com:
David W. Fenton wrote:
>What in the *hell* are you talking about? Access is only every
installed on a workstation, not on a server, and there's no such
thing as a Novell workstation. The only thing you put on a server
is the MDB data file, and that is accessed by workstations
through the file system, so installation of Jet or Access is
COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT FOR A NOVELL SERVER.

On a Novell network the server controls the content of the
workstations. This is how you allow some users to use some
programs and other users to NOT use those programs, and how you
limit users from installing "sanctioned" programs only. Just
because you don't understand a Novell network doesn't give you the
right to get all uppity about it.
I've been working with Novell networks for over 10 years. I do
understand tham. I think the way CNEs are trained to set them up is
as user-hostile as could ever be possible, but, I do understand
them.

If the Novell sysadmin decided to allow users access to Access
runtimes in two different versions, they could have access. There's
nothing about Novell that prevents this, except, perhaps, sysadmin
intransigence.
Oh wait. Now I sound like you.
Your statement as you originally made it was COMPLETELY WRONG.

So far as I'm aware, it's also wrong now that you've narrowed it to
Novell networks.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Jul 14 '06 #26

P: n/a
"Rick Brandt" <ri*********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:Qy********************@newssvr13.news.prodigy .com:
ManningFan wrote:
>On a Novell network the server controls the content of the
workstations. This is how you allow some users to use some
programs and other users to NOT use those programs, and how you
limit users from installing "sanctioned" programs only. Just
because you don't understand a Novell network doesn't give you
the right to get all uppity about it.

Oh wait. Now I sound like you.

None of your (out of the blue) Novell network behavior statements
alter the fact that your original comment...

2 versions of Access can not exist on the same O/S, the only way
you're going to do that is with a dual-boot computer. The DLLs
for the 2 versions of Access are completely different and will not
interract with each other.

...is a load of rubbish on all but this very specific Novell
environment which you only injected as a lame attempt to salvage
an incorrect position.
So far as I can tell, it's also wrong on Novell, unless the Novell
admin has decided to set it up that way.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Jul 14 '06 #27

P: n/a
Actually, you're wrong. But you're an "Access MVP" so I forgive you.

Rick Brandt wrote:
>
None of your (out of the blue) Novell network behavior statements alter the fact
that your original comment...
...is a load of rubbish on all but this very specific Novell environment which
you only injected as a lame attempt to salvage an incorrect position.
Jul 17 '06 #28

P: n/a
"ManningFan" <ma********@gmail.comwrote in
news:11**********************@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com:
Rick Brandt wrote:
>>
None of your (out of the blue) Novell network behavior statements
alter the fact that your original comment...
...is a load of rubbish on all but this very specific Novell
environment which you only injected as a lame attempt to salvage
an incorrect position.

Actually, you're wrong. But you're an "Access MVP" so I forgive
you.
<PLONK>

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Jul 17 '06 #29

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.