On Jul 16, 11:24*am, John Spencer <spen...@chpdm.edu> wrote:
> If these are multi-user databases then they SHOULD be split into a front-end
> Access database (all the forms, queries, reports, etc. but not the tables) and
> a back-end database (all the tables).
Yeah, I'm aware of that. Many of these were created awhile ago when I
was in earlier stages of learning about Access. Either that or they
were thrown together very quickly because I needed to create a report
or something fast, and were never meant to become productionized
tools. Anyway, most of them are not multi-user tools and don't
actually house any data themselves (they just pull data from other
sources that neither I nor anyone in my department owns, and do a
bunch of processing to create some form of result). I suppose from
that perspective, they already are front/back end designs.
>
> Each user should have a copy of the front-end and could put that in their
> trusted location. *Your backend would be placed in a shared location onthe
> LAN and the front-end application would link to the tables in this backend.
That's what I do for some of them, but I would really prefer to run
them from the LAN.
>
> This is probably the best way to handle this problem. *Tony Toews as an
> application that you can use to keep the front end current on all the users'
> computers. *http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/autofe.htm
I took a look at that, and it seems like a pretty cool utility. The
problem is that IT complains whenever an end user tries to download
and install/use something that's not approved through the proper
channels in the corporation. The amount of "red tape" we have to go
through due to the IT policies is bordering on ridiculous, and my
guess is that it's the number 1 reason we have so many little tools
developed by end users.