Hi -- I've "inherited" an Access 97 application, which I have converted to an
Access 2000 application using Access 2003. Now I want to deploy it so that
it includes the Access 2000 executable, so that users don't have to have
Access installed on their computer in order to use it.

Currently, there is a process in place to generate this type of installation
package for Access 97. I haven't looked at it, but I suspect it is a wizard
that came with Access 97. Obviously, this won't work for Access 2000, so I
am wondering what to do.

As I understand, there is an Access 2000 Developer Edition that provides
this kind of wizard, but obviously Microsoft doesn't still sell it, and I
couldn't find it anywhere, even on Ebay.

Does anyone have any idea what I can do about this?
--
CynthiaD

Well, if you going to use such older version like access 2000, why not stick
with access 97???

I mean, I am not sure it is such a good idea to develop in a2003, and then
deploy to a2000 anyway.

About the only reason I can see for you not wanting to use the access 2003
developers edition is that still want to deploy to windows 98 boxes.

Access 2002 was the last version that ran on windows 98.

I mean, really, about the only reason I can see to use a2000 is that you
want to be able to deploy on windows 98 boxes. However, if that is the case
then why not stick to using access 97?

You are converting an access 97 to a2003, but deploying to a2000? I not sure
you making this process very easy with such a large mix and matching of
different versions here???

I would dump the use of a2000..and just use a2003. If you really need
a2000, then why not stick with access 97????


--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
(E-Mail Removed)

I'm developing in Access 2000, because I don't have a copy of Access 97.
Access 2000 was the closest I could get to Access 97 and still be able to
develop in Access 2003. I did not want to make an enormous amount of changes
to it.

Nevermind, I will ask elsewhere.
--
CynthiaD


"Albert D. Kallal" wrote:

> Well, if you going to use such older version like access 2000, why not stick
> with access 97???
>
> I mean, I am not sure it is such a good idea to develop in a2003, and then
> deploy to a2000 anyway.
>
> About the only reason I can see for you not wanting to use the access 2003
> developers edition is that still want to deploy to windows 98 boxes.
>
> Access 2002 was the last version that ran on windows 98.
>
> I mean, really, about the only reason I can see to use a2000 is that you
> want to be able to deploy on windows 98 boxes. However, if that is the case
> then why not stick to using access 97?
>
> You are converting an access 97 to a2003, but deploying to a2000? I not sure
> you making this process very easy with such a large mix and matching of
> different versions here???
>
> I would dump the use of a2000..and just use a2003. If you really need
> a2000, then why not stick with access 97????
>
>
> --
> Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
> Edmonton, Alberta Canada
> (E-Mail Removed)
>
>
>