Access 2003 Runtime

[Powderfinger]

How can I get Access 2003 runtime? The 2000 runtime was included with the
Microsoft Office Developer (MOD) product, but that doesn't seem to be the
case with 2003. I read MS website and am still confused.

 

[Minton M]

How can I get Access 2003 runtime? The 2000 runtime was included with the
Microsoft Office Developer (MOD) product, but that doesn't seem to be the
case with 2003. I read MS website and am still confused.

My advice would be to jump straight to Access 2007 runtime because
it's free and easily downloadable from the MS website. Is there any
pressing need to stick to 2003?

 

[Powderfinger]

Thanks for the reply Milton, I have not thought of that. Is it really free?
I have a hard time MS would give away something like that.

I have a network of 5 clients running Access 2000 sharing one .mdb file on a
Windows 2003 server. My plan is to install SQL Server 2005 on the server and
convert the file using the upsizing wizard. Stick with .MDB rather than .ADP
and install Access 2003 runtime on all 5 clients instead of buying the full
blown version for each. Some of the clients are running Windows 2000
professional. Will Access 2007 work on this? Can the clients run Word 2000
and Excel 2000 along side Access 2007 runtime?

Jack

 

[Klatuu]

It is part of Microsoft Visual Studio for Office

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

How can I get Access 2003 runtime? The 2000 runtime was included with the
Microsoft Office Developer (MOD) product, but that doesn't seem to be the
case with 2003. I read MS website and am still confused.

You will have great difficulty finding the VSTO that Dave mentioned.
You might find a copy on Ebay but the legitimacy would be somewhat
questionable.

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's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

Thanks for the reply Milton, I have not thought of that. Is it really free?
I have a hard time MS would give away something like that.

Yes, it is free.

Microsoft Office Access 2007 Developer Edition FAQ
http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/developeredition2007faq.htm

I have a network of 5 clients running Access 2000 sharing one .mdb file on a
Windows 2003 server.

Sharing one unsplit MDB can lead to corruptions. You've been quite
fortunate.

My plan is to install SQL Server 2005 on the server and
convert the file using the upsizing wizard.

Why upsize to SQL Server for five client workstations? I have
clients running 25 users on Access without any problems.

See my Random Thoughts on SQL Server Upsizing from Microsoft Access
Tips page at http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/sqlserverupsizing.htm

There is a new tool from the SQL Server group.
SQL Server Migration Assistant for Access (SSMA Access)
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/solutions/migration/default.mspx
However it only supports SQL Server 2005.

If you are using SQL Server 2000 then you could install SQL Server
2005 Express on your system and then run some SQL Server utilities to
create schema scripts which you could then execute on SQL Server 2000.

Stick with .MDB rather than .ADP
Good.

Some of the clients are running Windows 2000
professional. Will Access 2007 work on this?

No. Access 2007 minimum requirements are Windows XP SP2, Win 2003
Server SP1 or later.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/access/HA101668651033.aspx

Can the clients run Word 2000
and Excel 2000 along side Access 2007 runtime?

Yes.

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's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/

 

[Powderfinger]

Tony,

Thanks for the reply.

I really don't belive splitting it would make a difference. . The users are
rather incompetent and they do stupid stuff like leave the program up all
night or turning off the computer rather than booting down. The result being
everyone has to get out of the database and rebuild and/or reboot the
server. I want to end the situation where everyone has to get out of the
program. SQL Server will, at least, keep things atomic.

I think splitting is overrated. Try this experiment. Do not split the db and
copy all the records in a table to another table in the db. Then try the
experiment with a split db. You'll find that the unsplit db copies twice as
fast. Splitting does help maintain the db which makes updates to the
frontend easier.

The owner is getting ready to expand to 25 users and wants to be ready. He
has a lot of money and it's quite refreshing to work for someone who wants
the top of the line no matter what it costs. My usuall clients are cheap
pennypinchers.

 

[Douglas J. Steele]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Like Tony, I'd say that you've been
extremely fortunate that you haven't suffered corruption sharing the
database. As well, by having the definition of forms, reports, macros and
modules on the server, you're causing extra unnecessary network traffic.

Sorry, but your test doesn't prove anything. Why on earth would you ever
need to do that in a production application?

--
Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP

(no e-mails, please!)

 

[Tony Toews [MVP]]

I really don't belive splitting it would make a difference. .

Then we agree to disagree.

The users are
rather incompetent and they do stupid stuff like leave the program up all
night

HOW TO: Detect User Idle Time or Inactivity in Access 2000 (Q210297)
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=210297
ACC: How to Detect User Idle Time or Inactivity (Q128814)
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=128814

However we found that the code which runs on the timer event must be
disabled for the programmers. Otherwise weird things start happening
when you're editing code.

Also print preview would sometimes not allow the users to run a menu
item to export the report to Excel or others. So you had to right
click on the Previewed report to get some type of internal focus back
on the report so they could then export it. This was also helped by
extending the timer to five minutes.

The downside to extending the timer to five minutes was if a person
stays in the same form and at the same control for considerable parts
of the day, ie someone doing the same inquiries, the routine didn't
realize that they had actually done something. I'll be putting in
some logic sometime to reset this timer whenever they do something in
the program.

or turning off the computer rather than booting down. The result being
everyone has to get out of the database and rebuild and/or reboot the
server. I want to end the situation where everyone has to get out of the
program. SQL Server will, at least, keep things atomic.

I think splitting is overrated. Try this experiment. Do not split the db and
copy all the records in a table to another table in the db. Then try the
experiment with a split db. You'll find that the unsplit db copies twice as
fast.

Yes, an unsplit db is faster. However with the tips at the Access
Performance FAQ page at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/access/performancefaq.htm
you can get it just about as fast.

Splitting does help maintain the db which makes updates to the
frontend easier.
Agreed

The owner is getting ready to expand to 25 users and wants to be ready. He
has a lot of money and it's quite refreshing to work for someone who wants
the top of the line no matter what it costs.

Nice to hear. Sure, if that's the case then I would agree with your
logic.

My usuall clients are cheap pennypinchers.

Ayup, I've got those too.

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's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/