Dear All,

Writing with a very high hope to get a good solution and I believe there
will lot of readers and users of Access facing the same problem and will be
looking forward to a solution to solve it.

I have developed a mdb in Microsoft Access 2000 (which has several form and
several type of reports in which I have done VBA coding to complete my
requirement).

Now I have to give the mdb to a company who has the following situation:
There are 6 Users. All are connected to each other through LAN. But there MS
Office Version is different to each other. 2 Users is having MS Office 2000
installed, 1 user is having MS Office 2002 installed and other 3users are
having Ms office 2007 installed. Situation of the customer is that he don’t
want to split the mdb (for front end and back-end) as all the user will not
be using the mdb every time (he assures), therefore, he want me keep the mdb
on any of the machine and let all the pc have the shortcut to get the mdb
opened when required.

One way I understand to handle this situation is to make the mdb as run time
But sorry to say that I don’t have the MS Office 2000 developer version to do
this, therefore I am unable to make it as mdb run time.

Secondly the following is in my mind, which I want to clarify before
deciding to deliver:
1. On which version of MS office PC I should keep so that it will be safe
and give better performance.
2. Does the higher version of Access like 2003 and specially 2007 will make
any problem in performing
3. What steps and changes I should be prepared to handle the situation.
4. Any changes or modification I should do before giving this mdb, specially
in VBA coding.
5. I have disabled the shiftkey and set the password for viewing the code of
module, Does this safety will be same in Access 2007 (I am sure that till
Access 2003 it will be same and maintained) or it will broken.

Thirdly – I noticed the problem while just testing the mdb on the access
2007 on one of the laptop found there is so much of unwanted menu’s and
toolbar’s available at the top of the form, As accordingly it should hide all
the toolbars and menu bars and it should show only the custom toolbars and
menus one which I made and has set to it. It works perfect in MS office 2000
to MS –office 2002. How to hide the unwanted/builtin menu/toolbars and to
show my customer menu/toolbar on the form/report. As it is really viewing odd.

Fourthly – I am worried that the VBA code which I have used for Ms access
2000 will run perfectly in access 2007 or not.


My main worry now a days is always for the below both:

A. How to convenience customer to use MS Access database. As customer is
always worried and afraid of access updating of version and the problem
occurring due to this. As updating of all the computer for same version needs
expenses. Secondly they want to refer so many websites where the future of
Access showing NOT GOOD and discouragement for large scale data management is
not recommended. Also some prefer to migrate from Access to Oracle or SQL.
This makes Customer think again and again before agree for giving the job of
access database.

B. My personal worry is that – Is there any future if I continue developing
access database as my profession, If not how to update myself and move to
which so that better future can be obtained in the programming. From Last 6
years and I am developing programs in access mdb for the several types of
professions.


Thanking you all in advance for the solutions and valuable advises.

Regards

Irsh

"Irshad Alam" <IrshadAlam@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BCB0624E-4A9F-4266-9764-55A302842505@microsoft.com...

> There are 6 Users. All are connected to each other through LAN. But there
> MS
> Office Version is different to each other. 2 Users is having MS Office
> 2000
> installed, 1 user is having MS Office 2002 installed and other 3users are
> having Ms office 2007 installed.

The solution to the above is:

a) use the a2000 runtime, and they are all on the same version

b) use the a2007 runtime, and they are all on the same version

c) give each version their appropriate version of an access front end.

Remember it even if you're using an old version like access 97, it works
just fine with outlook 2007, or word 2007. So the problem is not really so
much that they have different versions of office, it's really what you're
going to decide with regards to what version of access. And, if you use the
runtime, then you do not even have to have to purchase and install MS access
at all.

if you don't have control over what version of MS access to going to use,
then you'll use the option C. So, simply split and give them an
appropriate version. As long as you keep the backend database in the lowest
common denominator version, then you can run mixed versions of MS access
without problems.

I did this with a client was upgraded from access 97 to
access 2003. They had about 25 computers and over several months they
upgraded about 5 comptuers per day. (from win98 to winxp).
At the same time they upgraded their versions of office. It's
quite amazing that they're running different operating systems, and
different versions of MS access, and yet the whole process of running
different versions of access and the windows operating system
AT THE SAME TIME went 100% smooth as glass. In fact they had less problems
running MS access on different versions and different systems than they had
with almost every other piece of software from other vendors in the building
trying to upgrade their computers.

So while you don't have control the what version of office they're using,
you likely do have control over what versions of access they use.
And, if you don't have control over what version of access, then
you simply provide the front end to the appropriate version of access.

> Situation of the customer is that he don't
> want to split the mdb (for front end and back-end) as all the user will
> not
> be using the mdb every time

The above is just plain stupid. You mean you're coming to this newsgroup to
ask for advice from professionals, but then next you're telling me that
your boss is going to override any intelligent suggestion given? So you mean
if you go to a group of mechanics that tell you it is a good idea to change
the oil in your car, but hte boss says we should never change the
oil? If you boss is going to ignore and override your decisions here, then
your wasting everybody's time hjere are you not?

Thank goodness the boss is not the manager of a hospital where he overrides
good medical advice doctors are giving to patients. Sometimes I wish I
worked in a hospital, because then people who are incompetent often go to
jail. In your case if your boss overrides your decisions, then you just
going to have a crappie and unreliable system, and that's just wasting his
money.

Ask the boss what you do with excel, he'll say for the last many years we've
always install the software on each PC.

Ask the boss what you do with word, he'll say for the last many years we've
always install the software on each PC

Since they always been installing almost every other piece of software on
each PC in the building, then if you come along and develop some software
for him, why would they not do the same, and install the software on each
pc? It is possible that the boss don't understand the difference
between an application wiht forms + code etc, and that simply
opening up the word document (there's a grand canyon between the two
different types of fiels here, one is data (like excel, or word), and
the other is an application with code. You simply need to point
out that installing software on each pc is really the ONLY way to go.

>
> One way I understand to handle this situation is to make the mdb as run
> time
> But sorry to say that I don't have the MS Office 2000 developer version to
> do
> this, therefore I am unable to make it as mdb run time.

OK since you don't have the access 2000 runtime, that that's not a choice
is it? So, you can consider using
access 2007 runtime? In other words it is very possible that they don't care
or use any particular version of MS access on each computer, and therefore
you get to make this decision for them. So either you supply a front end for
each particular version of access that they have on each PC, or you simply
install the 2007 runtime and thus are ALL on the same version, either
approach
will works extremely well.

> 1. On which version of MS office PC I should keep so that it will be safe
> and give better performance.

Well I've been in the computer business almost twenty years now, and I can
not ever remember the next version of the piece of software running faster
than the previous version. In most cases when you upgrade your software
that software requires more processing, more hard disk, and more memory to
run.

Of course when you're upgrading your versions of office, you're often
updating your computers to more memory, more processing etc at the same
time. So, this tends to work out quite well. You'll want to keep this in
mind if they have some really weaker older computers the office with limited
memory and processing. If some of the computers have limited processing and
weak memory, then I would keep them on their current existing version of
access, and simply split up the front end to the appropriate version of
access that they're using for each computer. I do think when a company goes
beyond two versions of office, they're asking for trouble not with MS
access, but simply for the support people and other issues can increase the
cost of running computers. The more each computers are exactly the same, the
more you reduce your costs (since when you have one problem and you fix it
on one computer, it applies to every other computer and the office).


> 2. Does the higher version of Access like 2003 and specially 2007 will
> make
> any problem in performing

It is not really a problem of performing, but you wanna keep in mind the
additional requirements of new or software tends to take more horsepower to
run.

> 4. Any changes or modification I should do before giving this mdb,
> specially
> in VBA coding.

The VBA coding remains unchanged and you should have little if any problem
in this regards. the only questions of what you decide what version upgrade
two, and it's not clear what kind of controll and say you have in this
matter. as mention of the RT have a version of MS access installed and you
don't have a choice, then simply supply the appropriate front and to each
computer.

> 5. I have disabled the shiftkey and set the password for viewing the code
> of
> module, Does this safety will be same in Access 2007

Yes, that should be the same (however I would not use a password for the
code, he should be distributing an mde, or accDE to each user - that way
they can modify your code, forms, or reports anyway


> Thirdly - I noticed the problem while just testing the mdb on the access
> 2007 on one of the laptop found there is so much of unwanted menu's and
> toolbar's available at the top of the form, As accordingly it should hide
> all
> the toolbars and menu bars

The problem is access 2007 is a big change in terms the user interface, and
I recommend that if you go to 2007 you rewrite your menu bars as ribbons.

I've always been able to hide the complete menu in interface and access 2003
without any code, and I have a sample.

Try downloading and running the 3rd example at my following web site that
shows a hidden ms-access interface, and NO CODE is required to do
this....but just some settings in the start-up.

Check out:

http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKal...s/DownLoad.htm

above is 2000, so you can try it now on a pc with a2000.

Note that the above I also have a sample in there that hides all the
interface in 2007 also.

>
> Fourthly - I am worried that the VBA code which I have used for Ms access
> 2000 will run perfectly in access 2007 or not.

as mentioned I've not noticed any change in the VBA at all...

> A. How to convenience customer to use MS Access database. As customer is
> always worried and afraid of access updating of version and the problem
> occurring due to this

You mean the customer willing to install different versions of other
applications and upgrade them. Then why would they not apply the same
philosophy and approach to upgrading their MS access applications? This
makes absolute no sense that they're willing to upgrade word, but then not
run an updated copy of your front end? (this is just plain stupid and
silly).

You mean the company actually spends some real money and bucks to install an
updated version of office, but then you come along and they say no that you
can not upgrade your front end?). The simple solution is to use a runtime
and stick to one version of access. If you can't do that (or don't have
control over what version of ms-access), then you simply distribute the
appropriate version of your front end to the computer (just like they've
done for an evening else they've changed).

>. Secondly they want to refer so many websites where the future of
> Access showing NOT GOOD and discouragement for large scale data management
> is
> not recommended.

I've never heard any website stating the above? I think people are confusing
the difference between the database engine in the development tool.

>Also some prefer to migrate from Access to Oracle or SQL.

And how can you build a form in SQL? How can you build a form in oracle
server? These systems do not allow you to build the user interface, but are
only database engines.

When you build an application MS access, you then choose your database such
as oracle, or SQL server, or perhaps even the built jet database engine.
I think
these people are getting confused between something like a developers to
like the c++, vb6, or ms-access.

You would not come here and say how can I replace vb6 with SQL server? It
sounds rather silly to make that statement. So, to say that you to replace
MS access was SQL server makes no sense at all since how are you going to
build a form and SQL server? (please explain???).

If you have a small application and only have about 100 users at the same
time, then you build the application MS access, and you put the backend in
the free edition of SQL server, or oracle or whatever you choose.

You can't say that you're gonna replace c++ with SQL server either can you?
It's not possible to replace MS access with SQL server. (it is most
certainly possible to change the database engine called jet that MS access
use by default, but jet is not MS access here).

>
> B. My personal worry is that - Is there any future if I continue
> developing
> access database as my profession, If not how to update myself and move to
> which so that better future can be obtained in the programming. From Last
> 6
> years and I am developing programs in access mdb for the several types of
> professions.

The future MS access is very bright, and access continues to get new and
amazing
features. For example here is bill gates talking about the future of MS
access

http://blogs.msdn.com/danielfe/archi...interview.aspx

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
pleaseNOOSpamKallal@msn.com

>that way
they can modify your code, forms, or reports anyway

should read:

that way
they can NOT modify your code, forms, or reports anyway

Hi Sir,

Thank you so much for your reply and valuable advises.

I am trying to convenience my customer, lets see. I myself prefer to split
and give the database to them as it will be safe for them as well for me to
handle. And will try to handle the situation as your advised regarding the
version as you can understand far better than me.

Regarding the customer fear, when I asked him further for any website he
read against Access, he showed me the below and started discussion on these
topics:

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=386

Any how, I have not tried the access interface hiding examples, I will try
and get back to you through newsgroup and also about the future of access
interview.

Regards

Irshad




"Albert D. Kallal" wrote:

> "Irshad Alam" <IrshadAlam@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:BCB0624E-4A9F-4266-9764-55A302842505@microsoft.com...
>
> > There are 6 Users. All are connected to each other through LAN. But there
> > MS
> > Office Version is different to each other. 2 Users is having MS Office
> > 2000
> > installed, 1 user is having MS Office 2002 installed and other 3users are
> > having Ms office 2007 installed.
>
> The solution to the above is:
>
> a) use the a2000 runtime, and they are all on the same version
>
> b) use the a2007 runtime, and they are all on the same version
>
> c) give each version their appropriate version of an access front end.
>
> Remember it even if you're using an old version like access 97, it works
> just fine with outlook 2007, or word 2007. So the problem is not really so
> much that they have different versions of office, it's really what you're
> going to decide with regards to what version of access. And, if you use the
> runtime, then you do not even have to have to purchase and install MS access
> at all.
>
> if you don't have control over what version of MS access to going to use,
> then you'll use the option C. So, simply split and give them an
> appropriate version. As long as you keep the backend database in the lowest
> common denominator version, then you can run mixed versions of MS access
> without problems.
>
> I did this with a client was upgraded from access 97 to
> access 2003. They had about 25 computers and over several months they
> upgraded about 5 comptuers per day. (from win98 to winxp).
> At the same time they upgraded their versions of office. It's
> quite amazing that they're running different operating systems, and
> different versions of MS access, and yet the whole process of running
> different versions of access and the windows operating system
> AT THE SAME TIME went 100% smooth as glass. In fact they had less problems
> running MS access on different versions and different systems than they had
> with almost every other piece of software from other vendors in the building
> trying to upgrade their computers.
>
> So while you don't have control the what version of office they're using,
> you likely do have control over what versions of access they use.
> And, if you don't have control over what version of access, then
> you simply provide the front end to the appropriate version of access.
>
> > Situation of the customer is that he don't
> > want to split the mdb (for front end and back-end) as all the user will
> > not
> > be using the mdb every time
>
> The above is just plain stupid. You mean you're coming to this newsgroup to
> ask for advice from professionals, but then next you're telling me that
> your boss is going to override any intelligent suggestion given? So you mean
> if you go to a group of mechanics that tell you it is a good idea to change
> the oil in your car, but hte boss says we should never change the
> oil? If you boss is going to ignore and override your decisions here, then
> your wasting everybody's time hjere are you not?
>
> Thank goodness the boss is not the manager of a hospital where he overrides
> good medical advice doctors are giving to patients. Sometimes I wish I
> worked in a hospital, because then people who are incompetent often go to
> jail. In your case if your boss overrides your decisions, then you just
> going to have a crappie and unreliable system, and that's just wasting his
> money.
>
> Ask the boss what you do with excel, he'll say for the last many years we've
> always install the software on each PC.
>
> Ask the boss what you do with word, he'll say for the last many years we've
> always install the software on each PC
>
> Since they always been installing almost every other piece of software on
> each PC in the building, then if you come along and develop some software
> for him, why would they not do the same, and install the software on each
> pc? It is possible that the boss don't understand the difference
> between an application wiht forms + code etc, and that simply
> opening up the word document (there's a grand canyon between the two
> different types of fiels here, one is data (like excel, or word), and
> the other is an application with code. You simply need to point
> out that installing software on each pc is really the ONLY way to go.
>
> >
> > One way I understand to handle this situation is to make the mdb as run
> > time
> > But sorry to say that I don't have the MS Office 2000 developer version to
> > do
> > this, therefore I am unable to make it as mdb run time.
>
> OK since you don't have the access 2000 runtime, that that's not a choice
> is it? So, you can consider using
> access 2007 runtime? In other words it is very possible that they don't care
> or use any particular version of MS access on each computer, and therefore
> you get to make this decision for them. So either you supply a front end for
> each particular version of access that they have on each PC, or you simply
> install the 2007 runtime and thus are ALL on the same version, either
> approach
> will works extremely well.
>
> > 1. On which version of MS office PC I should keep so that it will be safe
> > and give better performance.
>
> Well I've been in the computer business almost twenty years now, and I can
> not ever remember the next version of the piece of software running faster
> than the previous version. In most cases when you upgrade your software
> that software requires more processing, more hard disk, and more memory to
> run.
>
> Of course when you're upgrading your versions of office, you're often
> updating your computers to more memory, more processing etc at the same
> time. So, this tends to work out quite well. You'll want to keep this in
> mind if they have some really weaker older computers the office with limited
> memory and processing. If some of the computers have limited processing and
> weak memory, then I would keep them on their current existing version of
> access, and simply split up the front end to the appropriate version of
> access that they're using for each computer. I do think when a company goes
> beyond two versions of office, they're asking for trouble not with MS
> access, but simply for the support people and other issues can increase the
> cost of running computers. The more each computers are exactly the same, the
> more you reduce your costs (since when you have one problem and you fix it
> on one computer, it applies to every other computer and the office).
>
>
> > 2. Does the higher version of Access like 2003 and specially 2007 will
> > make
> > any problem in performing
>
> It is not really a problem of performing, but you wanna keep in mind the
> additional requirements of new or software tends to take more horsepower to
> run.
>
> > 4. Any changes or modification I should do before giving this mdb,
> > specially
> > in VBA coding.
>
> The VBA coding remains unchanged and you should have little if any problem
> in this regards. the only questions of what you decide what version upgrade
> two, and it's not clear what kind of controll and say you have in this
> matter. as mention of the RT have a version of MS access installed and you
> don't have a choice, then simply supply the appropriate front and to each
> computer.
>
> > 5. I have disabled the shiftkey and set the password for viewing the code
> > of
> > module, Does this safety will be same in Access 2007
>
> Yes, that should be the same (however I would not use a password for the
> code, he should be distributing an mde, or accDE to each user - that way
> they can modify your code, forms, or reports anyway
>
>
> > Thirdly - I noticed the problem while just testing the mdb on the access
> > 2007 on one of the laptop found there is so much of unwanted menu's and
> > toolbar's available at the top of the form, As accordingly it should hide
> > all
> > the toolbars and menu bars
>
> The problem is access 2007 is a big change in terms the user interface, and
> I recommend that if you go to 2007 you rewrite your menu bars as ribbons.
>
> I've always been able to hide the complete menu in interface and access 2003
> without any code, and I have a sample.
>
> Try downloading and running the 3rd example at my following web site that
> shows a hidden ms-access interface, and NO CODE is required to do
> this....but just some settings in the start-up.
>
> Check out:
>
> http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKal...s/DownLoad.htm
>
> above is 2000, so you can try it now on a pc with a2000.
>
> Note that the above I also have a sample in there that hides all the
> interface in 2007 also.
>
> >
> > Fourthly - I am worried that the VBA code which I have used for Ms access
> > 2000 will run perfectly in access 2007 or not.
>
> as mentioned I've not noticed any change in the VBA at all...
>
> > A. How to convenience customer to use MS Access database. As customer is
> > always worried and afraid of access updating of version and the problem
> > occurring due to this
>
> You mean the customer willing to install different versions of other
> applications and upgrade them. Then why would they not apply the same
> philosophy and approach to upgrading their MS access applications? This
> makes absolute no sense that they're willing to upgrade word, but then not
> run an updated copy of your front end? (this is just plain stupid and
> silly).
>
> You mean the company actually spends some real money and bucks to install an
> updated version of office, but then you come along and they say no that you
> can not upgrade your front end?). The simple solution is to use a runtime
> and stick to one version of access. If you can't do that (or don't have
> control over what version of ms-access), then you simply distribute the
> appropriate version of your front end to the computer (just like they've
> done for an evening else they've changed).
>
> >. Secondly they want to refer so many websites where the future of
> > Access showing NOT GOOD and discouragement for large scale data management
> > is
> > not recommended.
>
> I've never heard any website stating the above? I think people are confusing
> the difference between the database engine in the development tool.
>
> >Also some prefer to migrate from Access to Oracle or SQL.
>
> And how can you build a form in SQL? How can you build a form in oracle
> server? These systems do not allow you to build the user interface, but are
> only database engines.
>
> When you build an application MS access, you then choose your database such
> as oracle, or SQL server, or perhaps even the built jet database engine.
> I think
> these people are getting confused between something like a developers to
> like the c++, vb6, or ms-access.
>
> You would not come here and say how can I replace vb6 with SQL server? It
> sounds rather silly to make that statement. So, to say that you to replace
> MS access was SQL server makes no sense at all since how are you going to
> build a form and SQL server? (please explain???).
>
> If you have a small application and only have about 100 users at the same
> time, then you build the application MS access, and you put the backend in
> the free edition of SQL server, or oracle or whatever you choose.
>
> You can't say that you're gonna replace c++ with SQL server either can you?
> It's not possible to replace MS access with SQL server. (it is most
> certainly possible to change the database engine called jet that MS access
> use by default, but jet is not MS access here).
>
> >
> > B. My personal worry is that - Is there any future if I continue
> > developing
> > access database as my profession, If not how to update myself and move to
> > which so that better future can be obtained in the programming. From Last
> > 6
> > years and I am developing programs in access mdb for the several types of
> > professions.
>
> The future MS access is very bright, and access continues to get new and
> amazing
> features. For example here is bill gates talking about the future of MS
> access
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/danielfe/archi...interview.aspx
>
> --
> Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
> Edmonton, Alberta Canada
> pleaseNOOSpamKallal@msn.com
>
>
>
>

"Irshad Alam" <IrshadAlam@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:03683868-EE6F-4A0C-B1EC-805CF80AF042@microsoft.com...

> Regarding the customer fear, when I asked him further for any website he
> read against Access, he showed me the below and started discussion on
> these
> topics:
>
> http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=386
>
the above did not really debate the future of access, but only had comments
by some people who thought it was not "strong" enough of a tool for certain
types of applications. So, I saw nothing in the above that debated the
"future"
of access. There was certainly comments by people who were confused between
sql server, or oracle or jet, and that of ms-access (they are very different
things). But, nothing in the original article, and the ensuing conversation
had ANYTHING that put the future of access in doubt...


--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
pleaseNOOSpamKallal@msn.com