By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
434,916 Members | 1,068 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 434,916 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

WARNING: Do not use Vista for multiple versions of Access!

P: n/a
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access.

--
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.

Dec 27 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
37 Replies


P: n/a
Allen Browne wrote:
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of
Access installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in
different versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with
Access 2007 installed.
It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works,
because the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at
all.
Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of
Access you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access
2003, 2002, or 2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library.
Naturally enough, that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library
and choose the correct one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run
Access 2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation
whenever you switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the
user who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In
cannot say if it applies to other versions of Vista, but since the
problem appears be be the interaction between Office and the Vista
registry, I don't see a reason why it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we
will hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use
multiple versions of Access.
Thanks for the heads-up Allen. Just to clarify though...are you saying that
even if Access 97 is the only version installed it will not work under Vista or
just that it cannot be repaired after running Access 2007 like the others can?

--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Dec 27 '06 #2

P: n/a
You can get Access 97 working again by installing it again.

But unless you reinstall it again each time you need to use it, it fails to
start with the dialog:
Microsoft Access can't be started.
Microsoft Access was unable to initialize the Windows Registry
Rerun Microsoft Access or Microsoft Office Setup to reinstall Microsoft
Access.

At this stage, I think my best option is to blow away the Vista install and
start over with WinXP. (I don't think I want to set up virtual machines to
handle the previous versions.)

--
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.
"Rick Brandt" <ri*********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:b8*****************@newssvr11.news.prodigy.ne t...
Allen Browne wrote:
>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of
Access installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in
different versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with
Access 2007 installed.
It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works,
because the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at
all.
Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of
Access you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access
2003, 2002, or 2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library.
Naturally enough, that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library
and choose the correct one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run
Access 2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation
whenever you switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the
user who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In
cannot say if it applies to other versions of Vista, but since the
problem appears be be the interaction between Office and the Vista
registry, I don't see a reason why it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we
will hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use
multiple versions of Access.

Thanks for the heads-up Allen. Just to clarify though...are you saying
that even if Access 97 is the only version installed it will not work
under Vista or just that it cannot be repaired after running Access 2007
like the others can?

--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Dec 27 '06 #3

P: n/a
On a scale of 1-10, this sounds like a really bad problem.

--
Darryl Kerkeslager
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote
It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because
the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

[cut]

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access
2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you
switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

[cut]

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access.

Dec 27 '06 #4

P: n/a
Does anyone have experience with an independent runtime install (e.g.,
Sagekey) of 97 or 2000 and Access 2007?
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.netwrote in message
news:ov******************************@comcast.com. ..
On a scale of 1-10, this sounds like a really bad problem.

--
Darryl Kerkeslager
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote
It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because
the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

[cut]

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access
2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you
switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

[cut]

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we
will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple
versions
of Access.


Dec 27 '06 #5

P: n/a
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 23:02:36 +0800, "Allen Browne"
<Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote:
>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate.
YOW.

Thanks, Allen. I've never been an "early adopter" and this warning
reinforces that prejudice!

John W. Vinson[MVP]
Dec 27 '06 #6

P: n/a
On a scale of 1-10, this sounds like a really bad problem.
>
On a scale of 1 - 10, I would say this is about a 15. <g>

--

Lynn Trapp
Microsoft MVP (Access)
www.ltcomputerdesigns.com
Dec 27 '06 #7

P: n/a
DMeister,

AFAIK, Sagekey do not yet have a runtime installation script for Access
2007.

--
Steve Schapel, Microsoft Access MVP

DMeister wrote:
Does anyone have experience with an independent runtime install (e.g.,
Sagekey) of 97 or 2000 and Access 2007?
Dec 27 '06 #8

P: n/a
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of
the user who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding.
In cannot say if it applies to other versions of Vista, but since
the problem appears be be the interaction between Office and the
Vista registry, I don't see a reason why it would be limited to
Ultimate.
Is the registry change being made in HKLM or on HKCU? If the latter,
then you could run different versions on different user logons.

But I'm not otpimistic about that.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 27 '06 #9

P: n/a
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
You can get Access 97 working again by installing it again.

But unless you reinstall it again each time you need to use it, it
fails to start with the dialog:
Microsoft Access can't be started.
Microsoft Access was unable to initialize the Windows Registry
Rerun Microsoft Access or Microsoft Office Setup to reinstall
Microsoft
Access.
Doesn't A97 have to run under an administrative logon, or have the
registry permissions tweaked to allow it to write to them? Is it not
the case that Vista locks down the registry even more than Win2K and
WinXP, and that this will cause issues with A97 if all you do is
install it with default settings?

Would it be possible to protect certain registry keys from change so
that A2K7 couldn't do this?

Or could you export the correct registry keys, then re-import them
after A2K7 changes them? You could then use a batch file to launch
other versions of Access that would repair the registry before the
app runs.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 27 '06 #10

P: n/a
Doesn't A97 have to run under an administrative logon, or have the
registry permissions tweaked to allow it to write to them? Is it not
the case that Vista locks down the registry even more than Win2K and
WinXP, and that this will cause issues with A97 if all you do is
install it with default settings?

Would it be possible to protect certain registry keys from change so
that A2K7 couldn't do this?

Or could you export the correct registry keys, then re-import them
after A2K7 changes them? You could then use a batch file to launch
other versions of Access that would repair the registry before the
app runs.
You right on the money. Apparently, people have said that if you "right
click" on the desktop shortcut,and choose "run with admin" permissions, all
versions can work together on vista.

So, you hit the nail here...it really is a permissions issue.

Apparently Allen is running as a admin logged on in this case, but this is
not necessary enough..and you STILL have to tell the system that the
shortcut is to be run with admin permissions (this is news to me...but,
apparently just being logged on as a admin is not necessary enough).

So far, it seems all versions can work if you "run" those shortcuts with
admin permissions. I not yet confirmed this, but another poster in the
private NG has stated this works (that "running" the shortcut(s) to
ms-access with admin permissions solves this).
--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
pl*****************@msn.com

Dec 28 '06 #11

P: n/a
"Albert D. Kallal" <Pl*******************@msn.comwrote in
news:OQ**************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
You right on the money. Apparently, people have said that if you
"right click" on the desktop shortcut,and choose "run with admin"
permissions, all versions can work together on vista.

So, you hit the nail here...it really is a permissions issue.

Apparently Allen is running as a admin logged on in this case, but
this is not necessary enough..and you STILL have to tell the
system that the shortcut is to be run with admin permissions (this
is news to me...but, apparently just being logged on as a admin is
not necessary enough).
Vista changes the whole way permissions are handled. You can run as
administrator, but most processes launch only with user-level
permissions. The idea is that you then determine which tasks you
want to use the full admin permissions.

This makes it possible to run with an admin logon more safely, but
it just seems confusing and stupid to me!

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 28 '06 #12

P: n/a
Okay, thanks to David, John, and others, for explaining the problem.

So the workaround is:

1. Delete any shortcuts created by the installation of each version.
These shortcuts do not have the "Run As Administrator" option.
Instead, create shortcuts to each msaccess.exe.

2. To run any version, right-click the shortcut and Run As Admin.
Choose Allow in the UAC (User Account Control) dialog.
Wait while that version installs.

3. If you accidentally double-clicked a shortcut so the version started
without admin priviliges, the libraries are wrong. Close and Run as Admin is
not enough. Since the version was running last, Vista doesn't see the need
to reinstall it. The process is:
a) Close it.
b) Run another version As Admin (so the wrong version installs.)
c) Close it.
d) Run As Admin the version you wanted to run in the first place.

4. With Access 2007, it's not necessary to Run As Admin.

To avoid the issues in #3 above, there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

--
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.

"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different
versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007
installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because
the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access
2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you
switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if
it applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be
the interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a
reason why it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access.
Dec 28 '06 #13

P: n/a
Hi, Allen.
there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?
I've never done this in Windows, but a search revealed these for example syntax:

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...6180cc1?hl=en&

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...42c4ca1?hl=en&

The following tools to automate "run as" aren't certified to run in Vista yet,
but since they're free, the cost ain't too high to try 'em out:

http://www.joeware.net/win/free/tools/cpau.htm

http://www.hiddensoft.com/AutoIt/ (This link is really slow tonight.)

HTH.
Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
Okay, thanks to David, John, and others, for explaining the problem.

So the workaround is:

1. Delete any shortcuts created by the installation of each version.
These shortcuts do not have the "Run As Administrator" option.
Instead, create shortcuts to each msaccess.exe.

2. To run any version, right-click the shortcut and Run As Admin.
Choose Allow in the UAC (User Account Control) dialog.
Wait while that version installs.

3. If you accidentally double-clicked a shortcut so the version started
without admin priviliges, the libraries are wrong. Close and Run as Admin is
not enough. Since the version was running last, Vista doesn't see the need to
reinstall it. The process is:
a) Close it.
b) Run another version As Admin (so the wrong version installs.)
c) Close it.
d) Run As Admin the version you wanted to run in the first place.

4. With Access 2007, it's not necessary to Run As Admin.

To avoid the issues in #3 above, there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

--
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.

"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access you
are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or 2000
attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough, that
fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct one,
since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions of
Access.

Dec 28 '06 #14

P: n/a
Okay, Peter Doering and the German MVPs have suggested this workaround:

a) Use an Adminstrator account in Vista.
b) Turn off User Access Control (UAC.) Go to:
Control Panel | User Accounts | Turn User Account Control on or Off.

This gives you the same results as running multiple versions under Win XP or
earlier.

Of course, that's not likely to be permitted if you are part of a team in a
corporate environment, but if you are SOHO or part of a small team, you can
probably get away with it - at we least until there is a better solution.

Thanks for the links, Gunny. Might help someone to find an alternative
workaround for other environments.

--
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.
"'69 Camaro" <Fo**************************@Spameater.orgZERO_SP AMwrote in
message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi, Allen.
>there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

I've never done this in Windows, but a search revealed these for example
syntax:

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...6180cc1?hl=en&

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...42c4ca1?hl=en&

The following tools to automate "run as" aren't certified to run in Vista
yet, but since they're free, the cost ain't too high to try 'em out:

http://www.joeware.net/win/free/tools/cpau.htm

http://www.hiddensoft.com/AutoIt/ (This link is really slow tonight.)

HTH.
Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact
info.
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>Okay, thanks to David, John, and others, for explaining the problem.

So the workaround is:

1. Delete any shortcuts created by the installation of each version.
These shortcuts do not have the "Run As Administrator" option.
Instead, create shortcuts to each msaccess.exe.

2. To run any version, right-click the shortcut and Run As Admin.
Choose Allow in the UAC (User Account Control) dialog.
Wait while that version installs.

3. If you accidentally double-clicked a shortcut so the version started
without admin priviliges, the libraries are wrong. Close and Run as Admin
is not enough. Since the version was running last, Vista doesn't see the
need to reinstall it. The process is:
a) Close it.
b) Run another version As Admin (so the wrong version installs.)
c) Close it.
d) Run As Admin the version you wanted to run in the first place.

4. With Access 2007, it's not necessary to Run As Admin.

To avoid the issues in #3 above, there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different
versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007
installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because
the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of
Access you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003,
2002, or 2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library.
Naturally enough, that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library
and choose the correct one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access
2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you
switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the
user who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot
say if it applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem
appears be be the interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I
don't see a reason why it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we
will hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple
versions of Access
Dec 28 '06 #15

P: n/a
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 23:02:36 +0800, "Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalid>
wrote:

Does Vista allow multiple boot operating systems on one hard drive?
If so, make a seperate boot section for XP and install the previous versions
of Access there.
>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access.
Dec 28 '06 #16

P: n/a
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:08:58 -0500, Chuck <li*****@schoollink.net>
wrote:

I think Allen is aware of that. He even suggested Virtual PC. But we
just don't want to go there. We want to run multiple versions of
Access immediately after each other, or perhaps even simultaneously.

Turning off User Access Control seems the best option so far.

-Tom.

>On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 23:02:36 +0800, "Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalid>
wrote:

Does Vista allow multiple boot operating systems on one hard drive?
If so, make a seperate boot section for XP and install the previous versions
of Access there.
>>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access.
Dec 28 '06 #17

P: n/a
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 07:40:06 -0700, Tom van Stiphout <no*************@cox.net>
wrote:

Not surprising. However, sometimes a very simple solution does get over
looked.
>On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:08:58 -0500, Chuck <li*****@schoollink.net>
wrote:

I think Allen is aware of that. He even suggested Virtual PC. But we
just don't want to go there. We want to run multiple versions of
Access immediately after each other, or perhaps even simultaneously.

Turning off User Access Control seems the best option so far.

-Tom.

>>On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 23:02:36 +0800, "Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalid>
wrote:

Does Vista allow multiple boot operating systems on one hard drive?
If so, make a seperate boot section for XP and install the previous versions
of Access there.
>>>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access.
Dec 28 '06 #18

P: n/a
Hi, Allen.

Thanks for sharing this work-around. Many of us will be using it when we start
using Vista, because one version of Access is never enough.

Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
Okay, Peter Doering and the German MVPs have suggested this workaround:

a) Use an Adminstrator account in Vista.
b) Turn off User Access Control (UAC.) Go to:
Control Panel | User Accounts | Turn User Account Control on or Off.

This gives you the same results as running multiple versions under Win XP or
earlier.

Of course, that's not likely to be permitted if you are part of a team in a
corporate environment, but if you are SOHO or part of a small team, you can
probably get away with it - at we least until there is a better solution.

Thanks for the links, Gunny. Might help someone to find an alternative
workaround for other environments.

--
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.
"'69 Camaro" <Fo**************************@Spameater.orgZERO_SP AMwrote in
message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>Hi, Allen.
>>there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

I've never done this in Windows, but a search revealed these for example
syntax:

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...6180cc1?hl=en&

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...42c4ca1?hl=en&

The following tools to automate "run as" aren't certified to run in Vista
yet, but since they're free, the cost ain't too high to try 'em out:

http://www.joeware.net/win/free/tools/cpau.htm

http://www.hiddensoft.com/AutoIt/ (This link is really slow tonight.)

HTH.
Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>Okay, thanks to David, John, and others, for explaining the problem.

So the workaround is:

1. Delete any shortcuts created by the installation of each version.
These shortcuts do not have the "Run As Administrator" option.
Instead, create shortcuts to each msaccess.exe.

2. To run any version, right-click the shortcut and Run As Admin.
Choose Allow in the UAC (User Account Control) dialog.
Wait while that version installs.

3. If you accidentally double-clicked a shortcut so the version started
without admin priviliges, the libraries are wrong. Close and Run as Admin is
not enough. Since the version was running last, Vista doesn't see the need
to reinstall it. The process is:
a) Close it.
b) Run another version As Admin (so the wrong version installs.)
c) Close it.
d) Run As Admin the version you wanted to run in the first place.

4. With Access 2007, it's not necessary to Run As Admin.

To avoid the issues in #3 above, there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different
versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007
installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access

Dec 28 '06 #19

P: n/a
can't you just put a shortcut to each version of MS Access into the
sendto directory.. and then right-click SENDTO the appropriate version
of MS Access?

I mean seriously?

The sendto method was always preferred for doing this in 2000, XP so
why don't you bother testing this method before starting a big freakout
session?

-Aaron

Allen Browne wrote:
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access.

--
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.
Dec 28 '06 #20

P: n/a
hey DMeister.. did you used to be on IRC? ever talk to a guy named
Humboldt?

I would love to chat sometime :)

I've been really really interested in chatting with you for a while now
:)

-Aaron
aa*********@hotmail.com
aa*********@gmail.com
DMeister wrote:
Does anyone have experience with an independent runtime install (e.g.,
Sagekey) of 97 or 2000 and Access 2007?
"Darryl Kerkeslager" <ke*********@comcast.netwrote in message
news:ov******************************@comcast.com. ..
On a scale of 1-10, this sounds like a really bad problem.

--
Darryl Kerkeslager
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote
It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because
the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.
>
>[cut]
>
You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access
2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you
switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.
>
>[cut]
>
If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we
will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple
versions
of Access.
Dec 28 '06 #21

P: n/a
one version for MS Access _IS_ enough.

just use Access Data Projects and your life would be a lot simpler

-Aaron
'69 Camaro wrote:
Hi, Allen.

Thanks for sharing this work-around. Many of us will be using it when we start
using Vista, because one version of Access is never enough.

Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
Okay, Peter Doering and the German MVPs have suggested this workaround:

a) Use an Adminstrator account in Vista.
b) Turn off User Access Control (UAC.) Go to:
Control Panel | User Accounts | Turn User Account Control on or Off.

This gives you the same results as running multiple versions under Win XP or
earlier.

Of course, that's not likely to be permitted if you are part of a team in a
corporate environment, but if you are SOHO or part of a small team, you can
probably get away with it - at we least until there is a better solution.

Thanks for the links, Gunny. Might help someone to find an alternative
workaround for other environments.

--
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.
"'69 Camaro" <Fo**************************@Spameater.orgZERO_SP AMwrote in
message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Hi, Allen.

there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

I've never done this in Windows, but a search revealed these for example
syntax:

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...6180cc1?hl=en&

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...42c4ca1?hl=en&

The following tools to automate "run as" aren't certified to run in Vista
yet, but since they're free, the cost ain't too high to try 'em out:

http://www.joeware.net/win/free/tools/cpau.htm

http://www.hiddensoft.com/AutoIt/ (This link is really slow tonight.)

HTH.
Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
Okay, thanks to David, John, and others, for explaining the problem.

So the workaround is:

1. Delete any shortcuts created by the installation of each version.
These shortcuts do not have the "Run As Administrator" option.
Instead, create shortcuts to each msaccess.exe.

2. To run any version, right-click the shortcut and Run As Admin.
Choose Allow in the UAC (User Account Control) dialog.
Wait while that version installs.

3. If you accidentally double-clicked a shortcut so the version started
without admin priviliges, the libraries are wrong. Close and Run as Admin is
not enough. Since the version was running last, Vista doesn't see the need
to reinstall it. The process is:
a) Close it.
b) Run another version As Admin (so the wrong version installs.)
c) Close it.
d) Run As Admin the version you wanted to run in the first place.

4. With Access 2007, it's not necessary to Run As Admin.

To avoid the issues in #3 above, there must be a way to create a
script/batch shortcut that will Run As Admin. Suggestions?

"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different
versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007
installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access 2007,
when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works, because the
references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of Access
you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access 2003, 2002, or
2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library. Naturally enough,
that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library and choose the correct
one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access 2007
again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you switch
versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the user
who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot say if it
applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem appears be be the
interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I don't see a reason why
it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we will
hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple versions
of Access
Dec 28 '06 #22

P: n/a
I have yet to get even Access XP and Access 2003 to live in harmony on
the same XP machine, let alone Vista. I have gotten it to work
temporarily but as soon as I install service packs to get everything up
to date the dreaded Windows Installer is awakened whenever I switch
between versions. I've followed the appropriate Microsoft scriptures
regarding this and scoured the web for other solutions to no avail.
Are you saying you've gotten this to work and can switch between
versions without the Windows installer being invoked?

Bruce

Allen Browne wrote:
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.
Dec 28 '06 #23

P: n/a
No. The installer is still invoked for some versions, Bruce.
And it's long enough to make a coffee when you switch to A2007.

--
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.

<de***************@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11*********************@73g2000cwn.googlegrou ps.com...
>I have yet to get even Access XP and Access 2003 to live in harmony on
the same XP machine, let alone Vista. I have gotten it to work
temporarily but as soon as I install service packs to get everything up
to date the dreaded Windows Installer is awakened whenever I switch
between versions. I've followed the appropriate Microsoft scriptures
regarding this and scoured the web for other solutions to no avail.
Are you saying you've gotten this to work and can switch between
versions without the Windows installer being invoked?

Bruce

Allen Browne wrote:
>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of Access
installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in different
versions.
This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access 2007 installed.
Dec 29 '06 #24

P: n/a
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
Okay, Peter Doering and the German MVPs have suggested this
workaround:

a) Use an Adminstrator account in Vista.
b) Turn off User Access Control (UAC.) Go to:
Control Panel | User Accounts | Turn User Account Control on
or Off.

This gives you the same results as running multiple versions under
Win XP or earlier.
That's cutting off your nose to spite your face. The whole point of
UAC is to make it easy to automatically run programs that need to as
an admin user, and the ones that don't with user-level permissions.
Programs not designed for Vista may have this problem, and one of
them is exactly what you've encountered.

When you turn off UAC what you're doing is returning to the bad old
days of running everything as administrator. And you lose the new
security protections of Vista.

The first solution you posted is by far the best one.
Of course, that's not likely to be permitted if you are part of a
team in a corporate environment, but if you are SOHO or part of a
small team, you can probably get away with it - at we least until
there is a better solution.
I wouldn't recommend doing it in any circumstances.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 29 '06 #25

P: n/a
de***************@gmail.com wrote:
I have yet to get even Access XP and Access 2003 to live in harmony on
the same XP machine
Dumb question, but is there such a thing as Access XP? I thought that
was an incorrect term for Access 2003?
--
Tim http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~tmarshal/
^o<
/#) "Burp-beep, burp-beep, burp-beep?" - Quaker Jake
/^^ "Whatcha doin?" - Ditto "TIM-MAY!!" - Me
Dec 29 '06 #26

P: n/a
Tim Marshall wrote:
de***************@gmail.com wrote:
I have yet to get even Access XP and Access 2003 to live in harmony
on the same XP machine

Dumb question, but is there such a thing as Access XP? I thought that
was an incorrect term for Access 2003?
It's actually an incorrect term for Access 2002. That came as part of Office XP
and most people don't realize that the "XP" only refers to the suite and not any
of the programs themselves.

--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Dec 29 '06 #27

P: n/a
Hi, Tim.
Dumb question, but is there such a thing as Access XP? I thought that was an
incorrect term for Access 2003?
It's not a dumb question. Access XP is occasionally referred to when describing
Access 2002, due to it being a member of the Office XP suite of products. The
proper name is Access 2002, though. There is no Access XP. (And that hasn't
stopped me from calling it that on occasion!)

HTH.
Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Tim Marshall" <TI****@PurplePandaChasers.Moertheriumwrote in message
news:en**********@coranto.ucs.mun.ca...
de***************@gmail.com wrote:
>I have yet to get even Access XP and Access 2003 to live in harmony on
the same XP machine

Dumb question, but is there such a thing as Access XP? I thought that was an
incorrect term for Access 2003?
--
Tim http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~tmarshal/
^o<
/#) "Burp-beep, burp-beep, burp-beep?" - Quaker Jake
/^^ "Whatcha doin?" - Ditto "TIM-MAY!!" - Me

Dec 29 '06 #28

P: n/a
"Tim Marshall" <TI****@PurplePandaChasers.Moertheriumwrote in message
news:en**********@coranto.ucs.mun.ca...
de***************@gmail.com wrote:
>I have yet to get even Access XP and Access 2003 to live in harmony on
the same XP machine

Dumb question, but is there such a thing as Access XP? I thought that was
an incorrect term for Access 2003?
No, it was an incorrect term for Access 2002. (Understandable incorrect
term, though, since it's part of Office XP.)

--
Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP
http://I.Am/DougSteele
(no private e-mails, please)

Dec 29 '06 #29

P: n/a
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of
Access installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in
different versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access
2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works,
because the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at
all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of
Access you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access
2003, 2002, or 2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library.
Naturally enough, that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library
and choose the correct one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access
2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you
switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the
user who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot
say if it applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem
appears be be the interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I
don't see a reason why it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we
will hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple
versions of Access.
When I was actually working at this I kept separate machines for each
version for which I was developing.
I suppose today we could safely drop Access 2000 and anything previous
and use three machines which could cover 2002, 2003 and 2007, and Windows
XP and Vista. Assuming they are networked it would not be difficult to
import objects up, and using SaveAsText/LoadFromText (and perhaps a
little editing) one might be able to inport them down as well.
Developing in Access is not very demanding of machine. A couple of them
could be $500 jobbies.
I hate this reinstall thingme that happens when we try to use different
versions on the same machine, especially when it wants the CDs; I guess
MS doesn't realize that in some people's minds it's an enormous blackeye
for them, or doesn't care.

--
Lyle Fairfield
Dec 29 '06 #30

P: n/a
Hi, Lyle.
I hate this reinstall thingme that happens when we try to use different
versions on the same machine, especially when it wants the CDs; I guess
MS doesn't realize that in some people's minds it's an enormous blackeye
for them, or doesn't care.
Come to think of it, Microsoft has documented that they don't recommend running
multiple versions of Office on the same computer, yet we've known for years that
with the right tweaking, they can peacefully co-exist, so we do it anyway.
Perhaps this is their way of saying, "WE MEAN IT!!!"

It's enough to make me back off.

HTH.
Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Lyle Fairfield" <ly***********@aim.comwrote in message
news:Xn*********************************@216.221.8 1.119...
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
>If you develop for others, you probably have multiple versions of
Access installed so you can edit and create MDEs for clients in
different versions. This works fine under Windows XP, even with Access
2007 installed.

It does *not* work under Windows Vista Ultimate. After running Access
2007, when you open an earlier version of Access, no code works,
because the references are fouled up. And Access 97 does not work at
all.

Access should adapt the Access library according to the version of
Access you are using. Under Vista, this doesn't happen, so Access
2003, 2002, or 2000 attempt to use the Microsoft Access 12.0 library.
Naturally enough, that fails. You cannot just uncheck the bad library
and choose the correct one, since it is a required library.

You can "repair" your Access install, which works until you run Access
2007 again. Office already does a lengthy reinstallation whenever you
switch versions, so this is not a practical solution.

I've experienced this on Vista Ultimate, and the same was true of the
user who raised this in microsoft.public.access.formscoding. In cannot
say if it applies to other versions of Vista, but since the problem
appears be be the interaction between Office and the Vista registry, I
don't see a reason why it would be limited to Ultimate.

If there does turn out to be a simple solution for this, hopefully we
will hear soon. In the mean time, stay with Win XP if you use multiple
versions of Access.

When I was actually working at this I kept separate machines for each
version for which I was developing.
I suppose today we could safely drop Access 2000 and anything previous
and use three machines which could cover 2002, 2003 and 2007, and Windows
XP and Vista. Assuming they are networked it would not be difficult to
import objects up, and using SaveAsText/LoadFromText (and perhaps a
little editing) one might be able to inport them down as well.
Developing in Access is not very demanding of machine. A couple of them
could be $500 jobbies.
I hate this reinstall thingme that happens when we try to use different
versions on the same machine, especially when it wants the CDs; I guess
MS doesn't realize that in some people's minds it's an enormous blackeye
for them, or doesn't care.

--
Lyle Fairfield

Dec 29 '06 #31

P: n/a
Thank you to everyone who responded to this thread.

Have attempted to incorporate the various workarounds in this article:
Errors using multiple versions of Access under Vista
at:
http://allenbrowne.com/bug-17.html
with the advantages and limitations of each option.

--
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.
Dec 29 '06 #32

P: n/a
Come to think of it, Microsoft has documented that they don't recommend
running multiple versions of Office on the same computer, yet we've known
for years that with the right tweaking, they can peacefully co-exist, so
we do it anyway. Perhaps this is their way of saying, "WE MEAN IT!!!"
Hi Gunny,

Maybe so, but they just can't do that to developers who NEED to have
multiple versions running on the same machine in order to do conversions.
This is an issue that they really need to fix and not just tell us to stuff
it....LOL.

--

Lynn Trapp
Microsoft MVP (Access)
www.ltcomputerdesigns.com
Dec 29 '06 #33

P: n/a
Hi, Lynn.
Maybe so, but they just can't do that to developers who NEED to have multiple
versions running on the same machine
I'm confident Access developers will eventually find a way to do this that is
invisible or nearly so, because we just won't put up with this for long. :-)

Gunny

See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs.
See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips and tutorials.
http://www.Access.QBuilt.com/html/ex...ributors2.html for contact info.
"Lynn Trapp" <lt**********@ltcomputerdesigns.comwrote in message
news:Ow**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>Come to think of it, Microsoft has documented that they don't recommend
running multiple versions of Office on the same computer, yet we've known for
years that with the right tweaking, they can peacefully co-exist, so we do it
anyway. Perhaps this is their way of saying, "WE MEAN IT!!!"

Hi Gunny,

Maybe so, but they just can't do that to developers who NEED to have multiple
versions running on the same machine in order to do conversions. This is an
issue that they really need to fix and not just tell us to stuff it....LOL.

--

Lynn Trapp
Microsoft MVP (Access)
www.ltcomputerdesigns.com


Dec 29 '06 #34

P: n/a
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45**********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
Have attempted to incorporate the various workarounds in this
article:
Errors using multiple versions of Access under Vista
at:
http://allenbrowne.com/bug-17.html
with the advantages and limitations of each option.
Well, I must say I misunderstood something. I thought you could
permanently define a shortcut to run as administrator (without
writing code to invoke the RunAs service). That would be a really
stupid design on MS's part.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 29 '06 #35

P: n/a
"David W. Fenton" <XX*******@dfenton.com.invalidwrote in
news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0. 1:
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45**********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
>Have attempted to incorporate the various workarounds in this
article:
Errors using multiple versions of Access under Vista
at:
http://allenbrowne.com/bug-17.html
with the advantages and limitations of each option.

Well, I must say I misunderstood something. I thought you could
permanently define a shortcut to run as administrator (without
writing code to invoke the RunAs service). That would be a really
stupid design on MS's part.
It seems from what I've read that you can change the an executable
to run with admin privileges, as opposed to a shortcut. Can someone
investigate and see if you could change each of your non-A2K7
MSACCESS.EXE files to always run with admin privileges by right
clicking them and changing the appropriate properties?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 29 '06 #36

P: n/a
"David W. Fenton" <XX*******@dfenton.com.invalidwrote in
news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0. 1:
"David W. Fenton" <XX*******@dfenton.com.invalidwrote in
news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0. 1:
>"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45**********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
>>Have attempted to incorporate the various workarounds in this
article:
Errors using multiple versions of Access under Vista
at:
http://allenbrowne.com/bug-17.html
with the advantages and limitations of each option.

Well, I must say I misunderstood something. I thought you could
permanently define a shortcut to run as administrator (without
writing code to invoke the RunAs service). That would be a really
stupid design on MS's part.

It seems from what I've read that you can change the an executable
to run with admin privileges, as opposed to a shortcut. Can
someone investigate and see if you could change each of your
non-A2K7 MSACCESS.EXE files to always run with admin privileges by
right clicking them and changing the appropriate properties?
Also, there's apparently group policies that goven how UAC works.
Could someone look at those and see if they can be altered partially
to make this problem go away? It may be that the individual policies
don't control this, and the only way is to turn it off entirely, but
it's worth a look.

(sorry to be asking others to do this, but I'm very concerned about
this for the future, about a year from now when my first clients get
Vista, and I don't have any way to test it myself -- no hardware to
run it on)

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 29 '06 #37

P: n/a
"David W. Fenton" <XX*******@dfenton.com.invalidwrote in
news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0. 1:
"David W. Fenton" <XX*******@dfenton.com.invalidwrote in
news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0. 1:
>"David W. Fenton" <XX*******@dfenton.com.invalidwrote in
news:Xn**********************************@127.0.0 .1:
>>"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in
news:45**********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:

Have attempted to incorporate the various workarounds in this
article:
Errors using multiple versions of Access under Vista
at:
http://allenbrowne.com/bug-17.html
with the advantages and limitations of each option.

Well, I must say I misunderstood something. I thought you could
permanently define a shortcut to run as administrator (without
writing code to invoke the RunAs service). That would be a
really stupid design on MS's part.

It seems from what I've read that you can change the an
executable to run with admin privileges, as opposed to a
shortcut. Can someone investigate and see if you could change
each of your non-A2K7 MSACCESS.EXE files to always run with admin
privileges by right clicking them and changing the appropriate
properties?

Also, there's apparently group policies that goven how UAC works.
Could someone look at those and see if they can be altered
partially to make this problem go away? It may be that the
individual policies don't control this, and the only way is to
turn it off entirely, but it's worth a look.

(sorry to be asking others to do this, but I'm very concerned
about this for the future, about a year from now when my first
clients get Vista, and I don't have any way to test it myself --
no hardware to run it on)
Sorry to draw this out -- I'm reading and discovering things as I
go.

In the microsoft.public.windows.vista.security group, there are a
number of posts on UAC. Here are some message IDs that might provide
suggestions for resolving this issue:

<C8**********************************@microsoft.co m>

The followups to that post are pretty illuminating, especially:

<D8**********************************@microsoft.co m>

Another article pointed me to this:

http://windowsconnected.com/blogs/je.../12/21/97.aspx

which describes how to create a "run-time manifest" that allows you
to override default security settings. I don't know how the details
work, but maybe someone could look at it and try to figure it out.

The thread starting with this post:

<u9**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>

is a good walk-through of the way UAC works and why it's important.

I'd be interested if anyone can look through some of those resources
and see if it's possible to figure out a reasonable workaround for
the coexistence problem short of turning off UAC.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Dec 29 '06 #38

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.