I just acquired OfficeXP Developer's Edition and was wondering if anyone in the Tek-Tips audience has had any experience with this version of Access. I noted that many people had varying levels of heartburn with Access2K, saying it was slower than '97, produced more bloated .MDB files than '97, didn't convert older versions faithfully, etc. Since we don't have a specific XP forum I decided to ask this question here. I'd be interested in any responses. And, as I develop more expereince with the package, I'll report on my impressions herein, as well.-
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations SkipVought on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Access 2002
- Thread starter davidn
- Start date
I've used 2K for a few months now, and with my limited experience, it hasn't been that bad. The HELP system stinks on ice, but if you can get around that, it's not a big deal.
Have you existing apps that will need to be converted? The single biggest difference is the default use of ADO (ActiveX data objects) instead of DAO (Data Access Objects), but even this can be gotten around with the inclusion of the old DAO 3.6 libraries in your module REFERENCES section. This is where much of the conversion problems evidently occurred. I only use VBA code as a LAST resort, so I haven't had any real problems with the dozen or so apps I've converted, but if you have a lot of procedureal code, I can see where it would be a PITA checking all your library calls.
If you DON'T have any old systems to convert, it shouldn't be so bad.
I think what most of us would advise you on would depend on whether you've got old stuff to convert, or if you're starting fresh.
How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise my hand...
Another free Access forum:
More Access stuff at
Have you existing apps that will need to be converted? The single biggest difference is the default use of ADO (ActiveX data objects) instead of DAO (Data Access Objects), but even this can be gotten around with the inclusion of the old DAO 3.6 libraries in your module REFERENCES section. This is where much of the conversion problems evidently occurred. I only use VBA code as a LAST resort, so I haven't had any real problems with the dozen or so apps I've converted, but if you have a lot of procedureal code, I can see where it would be a PITA checking all your library calls.
If you DON'T have any old systems to convert, it shouldn't be so bad.
I think what most of us would advise you on would depend on whether you've got old stuff to convert, or if you're starting fresh.
How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise my hand...
Another free Access forum:
More Access stuff at
- Thread starter
- #3
Guess I wasn't as clear as I thought. I acknowledge that .MDB conversions could be a pain, but that's not really worrying me. I'm just reading temperatures for those who've installed, used the new Access. Do you like it? Do you perceive improvements over Access2K? Or is it just a warmed-over Office2K Access. Personally, I didn't think Office2K was better than the '97 version and I preferred to use the '97 version instead of Access2000. Guess I'm hoping XP is gonna be a big step forward.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question