What version of Access are the heavy developers using?

[brooks]

Doug, Tony, others ...

I still like A97 for the IDE and use it for a lot of my personal stuff.
I've worked in A2000 and A2002 for some clients. I have just received
A2003 ...

My question is what version(s) are favored by the heavyweights,
especially if the work is to be distributed to end users without Access
installed?

In which version did the runtime start getting bundled in a $800
package (with a ton of other stuff you probably don't need)?

What are some of the really VITAL enhancements that have been
introduced into Access upgrades and what version did they appear in?

Brooks

P.S. Tony, your webpage on runtimes is awesome. Thanks.

 

[Bill Mosca, MS Access MVP]

FWIW, I develop Acc 2000 databases in 2003 because I like the new error
checking like ControlSources, duplicate hot keys. And the 2003 help is a bit
better if you have a always-open internet connection.

I create 2000 mde's for deployment because I work with both 2000 and 2003
users. Some have Access, some use just the runtime.

As to the runtime being bundled with a lot of other stuff, hasn't it always
been that way?

And VITAL enhancements?.... I started coding in VB5 and hated the very
limited IDE in Access 97. The add-ins that are available (whether freeware
or not) for the IDE from 2000 and up simply do not exist for 97. Where can
you find a 97 code indenter? And that wonderful block commenter?

 

[brooks]

Bill,

Thanks for the post.

I'm not familiar with ControlSources.

So you use A2003 as an editor but create the frontend and backend in
A2000?

I like the A97 IDE because it is within Access itself and is easy to
toggle around it vs. opening up as a separate app.

I indent with the tab key as I go ... always have.

The 97 ADT is just for Access. The new arrangement with needing Visual
Studios seems to have a lot of other stuff with it.

Brooks

 

[Joan Wild]

And VITAL enhancements?.... I started coding in VB5 and hated the very
limited IDE in Access 97. The add-ins that are available (whether
freeware or not) for the IDE from 2000 and up simply do not exist for
97. Where can you find a 97 code indenter? And that wonderful block
commenter?

I recall having addins that did this in 97. I'll dig around to see what I
had. There was this, but I'm sure there were others:
http://www.zada.com.au/accessaddins.htm#access97

 

[Fred Boer]

Dear Brooks:

I'm not sure that the Body Mass Index of a developer is particularly
important. I mean while it *has* been suggested by a loved one that losing a
few pounds might be good for my health and perhaps might help alleviate a
bit of a snoring issue, and I use Access 2002, fwiw....

Besides, in our thin-obsessed culture, I doubt if you'll get many of the
really "heavy" developers to come forward... <g,d&r>

Cheers!
Fred Boer

 

[Bill Mosca, MS Access MVP]

Brooks

A control's ControlSource is like the control's field in a bound form.

Access 2003 lets you use the 2000 file format. I create the database in
2003, do all my developing there and create the MDE in Access 2000. (You
can't create a 2000 MDE in 2003).

You should always indent as you go, but I inherit a lot of databases with
poorly indented code. One click and an entire module is indented exactly how
I want it.

 

[aaron.kempf]

ADP; duh!

2002 or 2003 or 2007

-Aaron

 

[David W. Fenton]

My question is what version(s) are favored by the heavyweights,
especially if the work is to be distributed to end users without
Access installed?

I don't know what the term "heavyweights" means, but I support any
number of applications in A97, and A2K, about half and half. The A2K
apps are deployed running in A2K, A2K2 and A2K3. I don't develop in
anything but A2K format, however.

I would do the same if proposing a new app, unless there was some
clear reason why the new app would benefit from the handful of new
features in either A2K2 or A2K3. Other than the printer object, I
can't think of much of anything that would be worth it.

I prefer developing in A97, to be honest. I've never liked the
seperate VBE window.

 

[David W. Fenton]

The 97 ADT is just for Access.

Er, now. For A97, you have the Office Development toolkit, usually
abbreviated ODE (can't think what the E is for -- Extensions?). The
ADT ended with Access 2.

 

[aaron.kempf]

David;

no wonder you're a fucking midget and you don't appreciate ADP.

you really should open the book sometime; check it out.. the ADP design
of views / sprocs in SQL Server is revolutionary and it slaughters
anything in the MDB world.

-Aaron

 

[aaron.kempf]

David;

re: stuck in Access 2000
no wonder you're a fucking midget and you don't appreciate ADP.

you really should open the book sometime; check it out.. the ADP design
of views / sprocs in SQL Server is revolutionary and it slaughters
anything in the MDB world.

-Aaron

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per (e-mail address removed):

My question is what version(s) are favored by the heavyweights,
especially if the work is to be distributed to end users without Access
installed?

I'm not a heavyweight, but my choice of development environments is determined
by what the user's LAN support people have installed on their boxes.

In fact, one of the downsides of delivering an app developed w/MS Access is that
you have the next MS Office upgrade hanging over your head.

Nothing that can't be coped with by somebody with a little technical knowledge -
but if IT goes in there and changes a user's MS Office version it'll probably
break your app as far as the user is concerned until somebody intervenes.

Dunno if the same applies to an app delivered as a runtime.... although I'd
suspect that if/when IT pushes down an upgrade they might clobber whatever
runtime .DLLs are there....

 

[Tony Toews]

FWIW, I develop Acc 2000 databases in 2003 because I like the new error
checking like ControlSources, duplicate hot keys. And the 2003 help is a bit
better if you have a always-open internet connection.
Agreed.

I create 2000 mde's for deployment because I work with both 2000 and 2003
users. Some have Access, some use just the runtime.
Ayup.

And VITAL enhancements?.... I started coding in VB5 and hated the very
limited IDE in Access 97. The add-ins that are available (whether freeware
or not) for the IDE from 2000 and up simply do not exist for 97. Where can
you find a 97 code indenter? And that wonderful block commenter?

On my new laptop, granted it's got a decent amount of horse power,
some kinda dual processor, 1.5 Gb of RAM, 17" screen and 120 Gb hard
drive, I never did get around to getting A97 working due to the
license error.

That said I have a shortcut to the A97 help as that is fast, efficient
and indexes every word.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

 

[Tony Toews]

I like the A97 IDE because it is within Access itself and is easy to
toggle around it vs. opening up as a separate app.

It is and it isn't. I've gotten quite used to running the separate
VBA IDE now. F11 and ctrl (or is it alt) + F11 are your friends.
<smile>

But it would be nice to see some enhancements to the Access VBA IDE in
the next version.

I indent with the tab key as I go ... always have.

Likewise.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

 

[aaron.kempf]

Tony

of course.. Access 97 help doesn't have information on 'Access Data
Projects' which are the most important components in Access.

On the other side of the coin; SQL 2005 Books Online is a SLUG and it
doesn't work.. and it takes 30 seconds to launch.. so I frequently use
SQL 2000 Books Online; even though I've been working on SQL 2005 almost
exclusively for the past year or two.

Why doesn't Microsoft just come up with a simple, standard way to write
help files.. instead of shoving a new version down our throats every
other year?

I mean seriously here. It seems like MS can't make a decent HLP file..
year after year after year.

If i was in charge of MS; that would be the first thing that I would
do-- revert to an ancient HLP format or something-- because it worked--
it worked RIGHT.. and it worked the FIRST TIME.

-Aaron

 

[brooks]

David,

You are right ADT/ODE. I worked in Access 2.0 too.

'E' is for Edition, just looked at the CD.

Brooks

 

[aaron.kempf]

block commenter?

www.nztools.com is it?

or www.mztools.com ?

-Aaron