By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
434,652 Members | 1,905 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 434,652 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Are any of the new version of Access any better than 97?

P: n/a
I've been away from this newsgroup for quite some time, as my job had
changed to the point where I wasn't using Access much anymore.

When I left, most of you hated A2K ... and Access 2003 was still pretty new.
My experience has been that A97 can do almost anything that I've ever wanted
to do, and there is TONS of on-line code samples and support for A97.

Now that I'm "back" into using Access more in my job again ... what am I
missing by not upgrading?

Now that we're moving into another OS (Windows Vista) ... I'm expecting to
see more code that won't work ... similar to when WinXP was launched.
Any comments?

--
Don
=============================
E-Mail (if you must) My*****@Telus.net

Disclaimer:
Professional PartsPerson
Amateur Database Programmer {:o)

I'm an Access97 user, so all posted code samples are also Access97- based
unless otherwise noted.

================================================== ========================
Mar 19 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
10 Replies


P: n/a
Hi Don, and welcome back.

The new version - Access 2007 - is a watershed version. It is visually
different, and provides so many new features that you can't ignore it.
Naturally the initial version is buggy, so I would suggest waiting for SP1
before distributing to clients, but you really cannot afford to ignore it.

Stuff like being able to use rich text in a text box (HTML actually),
exporting to PDF, date fields that automatically offer a calendar to select
a date (no code), combos that you just right-click to add new items to the
lookup table, datasheets that show totals at the bottom and display with
alternating colors, ...

Rather than repeat them all here, there's a summary here:
http://allenbrowne.com/Access2007.html

If you missed the history with A2000, the initial release was so buggy as to
be unusable, but over the years many of the problems were fixed, and
naturally lots of our clients bought the JET 4 versions. So even the most
change-resistant developers were gradually forced into the new millenium.
:-)

--
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.

"Don Leverton" <le****************@telusplanet.netwrote in message
news:d%nLh.60817$lY6.8406@edtnps90...
I've been away from this newsgroup for quite some time, as my job had
changed to the point where I wasn't using Access much anymore.

When I left, most of you hated A2K ... and Access 2003 was still pretty
new.
My experience has been that A97 can do almost anything that I've ever
wanted
to do, and there is TONS of on-line code samples and support for A97.

Now that I'm "back" into using Access more in my job again ... what am I
missing by not upgrading?

Now that we're moving into another OS (Windows Vista) ... I'm expecting to
see more code that won't work ... similar to when WinXP was launched.
Any comments?

--
Don
=============================
E-Mail (if you must) My*****@Telus.net

Disclaimer:
Professional PartsPerson
Amateur Database Programmer {:o)

I'm an Access97 user, so all posted code samples are also Access97- based
unless otherwise noted.

================================================== ========================
Mar 19 '07 #2

P: n/a
Thanks Allen.
Nice job on explaining the pro/cons on that link as well.

I noticed the "ressurect VB" petition link on the Access Web ... I don't
suppose that has happened has it?

I guess my next step is to check MoneySoft's site to find out if this is
available as an "upgrade" from A97. I do like the fact that the run-time
version is being supplied free instead of having to have the developer
version to distribute an app.

Don
"Allen Browne" <Al*********@SeeSig.Invalidwrote in message
news:45***********************@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
Hi Don, and welcome back.

The new version - Access 2007 - is a watershed version. It is visually
different, and provides so many new features that you can't ignore it.
Naturally the initial version is buggy, so I would suggest waiting for SP1
before distributing to clients, but you really cannot afford to ignore it.

Stuff like being able to use rich text in a text box (HTML actually),
exporting to PDF, date fields that automatically offer a calendar to
select
a date (no code), combos that you just right-click to add new items to the
lookup table, datasheets that show totals at the bottom and display with
alternating colors, ...

Rather than repeat them all here, there's a summary here:
http://allenbrowne.com/Access2007.html

If you missed the history with A2000, the initial release was so buggy as
to
be unusable, but over the years many of the problems were fixed, and
naturally lots of our clients bought the JET 4 versions. So even the most
change-resistant developers were gradually forced into the new millenium.
:-)

--
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.

"Don Leverton" <le****************@telusplanet.netwrote in message
news:d%nLh.60817$lY6.8406@edtnps90...
I've been away from this newsgroup for quite some time, as my job had
changed to the point where I wasn't using Access much anymore.

When I left, most of you hated A2K ... and Access 2003 was still pretty
new.
My experience has been that A97 can do almost anything that I've ever
wanted
to do, and there is TONS of on-line code samples and support for A97.

Now that I'm "back" into using Access more in my job again ... what am I
missing by not upgrading?

Now that we're moving into another OS (Windows Vista) ... I'm expecting
to
see more code that won't work ... similar to when WinXP was launched.
Any comments?

--
Don
=============================
E-Mail (if you must) My*****@Telus.net

Disclaimer:
Professional PartsPerson
Amateur Database Programmer {:o)

I'm an Access97 user, so all posted code samples are also Access97-
based
unless otherwise noted.
================================================== ========================
>

Mar 19 '07 #3

P: n/a
Don Leverton wrote:
Thanks Allen.
Nice job on explaining the pro/cons on that link as well.

I noticed the "ressurect VB" petition link on the Access Web ... I
don't suppose that has happened has it?

I guess my next step is to check MoneySoft's site to find out if this
is available as an "upgrade" from A97. I do like the fact that the
run-time version is being supplied free instead of having to have the
developer version to distribute an app.
The biggest obstacle to moving to the latest versions is if you want/need to
support older OS versions. IIRC 2003 and 2007 only work on Win2K SP3 and
newer. Being able to offer an Install that uses the 97 and/or 2000 runtime
gives you the largest supported OS base. Otherwise it's just a case of
whether you consider the newer features worthwhile.

--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com

Mar 19 '07 #4

P: n/a
"Rick Brandt" <ri*********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:SN****************@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net :
The biggest obstacle to moving to the latest versions is if you
want/need to support older OS versions. IIRC 2003 and 2007 only
work on Win2K SP3 and newer. Being able to offer an Install that
uses the 97 and/or 2000 runtime gives you the largest supported OS
base. Otherwise it's just a case of whether you consider the
newer features worthwhile.
I thought 2007 works only on WinXP and Vista?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Mar 19 '07 #5

P: n/a
David W. Fenton wrote:
"Rick Brandt" <ri*********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:SN****************@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net :
>The biggest obstacle to moving to the latest versions is if you
want/need to support older OS versions. IIRC 2003 and 2007 only
work on Win2K SP3 and newer. Being able to offer an Install that
uses the 97 and/or 2000 runtime gives you the largest supported OS
base. Otherwise it's just a case of whether you consider the
newer features worthwhile.

I thought 2007 works only on WinXP and Vista?
Upon checking, that is correct. Apparently with XP you even need SP2.

--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Mar 19 '07 #6

P: n/a
Speaking of WinXP SP2... (going off-topic ... I know)

There is on "critical update" (K835732) which just REFUSES to install on
this PC. (P4-2400)
SP2 also refuses to install, but SP1 has been done. I went to Microsoft's
site and searched for a resoultion to this ... but haven't found it yet.

I bought another hard drive and planned to just re-format and start over ...
but holy cow ... I have a LOT of stuff scattered all over my drive that I
really don't want to risk losing. Not to mention the hours of downloading
all of the updates from "ground zero" forward.:( Ugh!

Has anyone else encountered this?
I'm thinking that I might rather just buy a new PC for $800 and get Vista
with it.(In a few months -- after the frenzy -- and the bugs.)

Don

"Rick Brandt" <ri*********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:Un******************@newssvr21.news.prodigy.n et...
David W. Fenton wrote:
"Rick Brandt" <ri*********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:SN****************@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net :
The biggest obstacle to moving to the latest versions is if you
want/need to support older OS versions. IIRC 2003 and 2007 only
work on Win2K SP3 and newer. Being able to offer an Install that
uses the 97 and/or 2000 runtime gives you the largest supported OS
base. Otherwise it's just a case of whether you consider the
newer features worthwhile.
I thought 2007 works only on WinXP and Vista?

Upon checking, that is correct. Apparently with XP you even need SP2.

--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com


Mar 20 '07 #7

P: n/a
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 01:10:32 GMT, "Don Leverton"
<le****************@telusplanet.netwrote:
>Speaking of WinXP SP2... (going off-topic ... I know)

There is on "critical update" (K835732) which just REFUSES to install on
this PC. (P4-2400)
SP2 also refuses to install, but SP1 has been done. I went to Microsoft's
site and searched for a resoultion to this ... but haven't found it yet.

I bought another hard drive and planned to just re-format and start over ...
but holy cow ... I have a LOT of stuff scattered all over my drive that I
really don't want to risk losing. Not to mention the hours of downloading
all of the updates from "ground zero" forward.:( Ugh!

Has anyone else encountered this?
I'm thinking that I might rather just buy a new PC for $800 and get Vista
with it.(In a few months -- after the frenzy -- and the bugs.)

Don

Check www.xxcopy.com, xxclone.com

Chuck
--
Mar 20 '07 #8

P: n/a
DEFINE BETTER! Thats a rather subjective term. Some will say yes,
others no. I HATE the AOLish look and feel of 2007. I LOVE some of
the new features. Too bad they couldnt add in the new power and
functionality w/o screwing up the interface.
On Mar 19, 12:06 am, "Don Leverton"
<leveriteNoJunkM...@telusplanet.netwrote:
I've been away from this newsgroup for quite some time, as my job had
changed to the point where I wasn't using Access much anymore.

When I left, most of you hated A2K ... and Access 2003 was still pretty new.
My experience has been that A97 can do almost anything that I've ever wanted
to do, and there is TONS of on-line code samples and support for A97.

Now that I'm "back" into using Access more in my job again ... what am I
missing by not upgrading?

Now that we're moving into another OS (Windows Vista) ... I'm expecting to
see more code that won't work ... similar to when WinXP was launched.
Any comments?

--
Don
=============================
E-Mail (if you must) My.N...@Telus.net

Disclaimer:
Professional PartsPerson
Amateur Database Programmer {:o)

I'm an Access97 user, so all posted code samples are also Access97- based
unless otherwise noted.

================================================== ========================

Mar 20 '07 #9

P: n/a
"Don Leverton" <le****************@telusplanet.netwrote in
news:cwGLh.64252$lY6.33626@edtnps90:
I bought another hard drive and planned to just re-format and
start over ... but holy cow ... I have a LOT of stuff scattered
all over my drive that I really don't want to risk losing.
Buy Partition Magic and repartition your existing drive. Move all of
your data onto the new partition and then reformat the old system
partition and reinstall Windows. If you do things right, such as
moving all your programs to the new partition and doing a search and
replace in the registry to move all references to C:\Program Files
to the new partition, you won't have to reinstall some of your
programs (though you will need to reinstall some badly written apps
that store data in the Windows folder).

Now, that will also lose your profiles, though, so you might want to
use your new hard drive so that you can import the old profiles from
the old system partition into the new drive's system partition.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/
Mar 20 '07 #10

P: n/a
SP2 wont install on pirated software! :P
On Mar 19, 9:10 pm, "Don Leverton"
<leveriteNoJunkM...@telusplanet.netwrote:
Speaking of WinXP SP2... (going off-topic ... I know)

There is on "critical update" (K835732) which just REFUSES to install on
this PC. (P4-2400)
SP2 also refuses to install, but SP1 has been done. I went to Microsoft's
site and searched for a resoultion to this ... but haven't found it yet.

I bought another hard drive and planned to just re-format and start over ...
but holy cow ... I have a LOT of stuff scattered all over my drive that I
really don't want to risk losing. Not to mention the hours of downloading
all of the updates from "ground zero" forward.:( Ugh!

Has anyone else encountered this?
I'm thinking that I might rather just buy a new PC for $800 and get Vista
with it.(In a few months -- after the frenzy -- and the bugs.)

Don

"Rick Brandt" <rickbran...@hotmail.comwrote in message

news:Un******************@newssvr21.news.prodigy.n et...
David W. Fenton wrote:
"Rick Brandt" <rickbran...@hotmail.comwrote in
>news:SN****************@newssvr23.news.prodigy.ne t:
>The biggest obstacle to moving to the latest versions is if you
>want/need to support older OS versions. IIRC 2003 and 2007 only
>work on Win2K SP3 and newer. Being able to offer an Install that
>uses the 97 and/or 2000 runtime gives you the largest supported OS
>base. Otherwise it's just a case of whether you consider the
>newer features worthwhile.
I thought 2007 works only on WinXP and Vista?
Upon checking, that is correct. Apparently with XP you even need SP2.
--
Rick Brandt, Microsoft Access MVP
Email (as appropriate) to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mar 20 '07 #11

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.