Access 2003 less functional than Access 97?

[George Hester]

Look at this page:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;258644&Product=acc

Now we know that using Microsoft Office 2003 we lose the Microsoft Photo Editor. Since we do not have that the directions of inserting a JPEG OLE object in an Access 2003 database on a form as an image will not work. For we do not have the option of choosing Microsoft Photo Editor because we do not have Microsoft Photo Editor in Microsoft Office 2003. But we do have Microsoft Photo Manager in Microsoft Office 2003. But the Microsoft Access 2003 team forgot to include that in the Insert Object... available Object Type.

Therefore Microsoft Access 2003 is less functional then Microsoft Access 97 because Microsoft Office 97 had the Microsoft Photo Editor and Microsoft Office 2000 and Microsoft Office XP.

I may sound perturbed and I am. I really do not like upgradeing only to find out that I have downgraded the functionality of an application I assumed was being upgraded.

Finally I am noticing that if I choose say an Imaging Document then the ability to open a New file is not available so even if the Microsoft Photo Editor existed in Microsoft Office 2003 I suspect the directions would fail at Resolution step 5.

If anyone has a workaround that mimics what the above article was trying to solve for Access 2003 I would be forever greatfull. Thanks.

 

[Stephen Lebans]

George you can simply install MS Photo Editor from your OfficeXP or
Office 2000 disk. There are a few caveats though. A googleGroups search
will result in several threads you should read on this issue.

--

HTH
Stephen Lebans
http://www.lebans.com
Access Code, Tips and Tricks
Please respond only to the newsgroups so everyone can benefit.


Look at this page:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;258644&Product=a
cc

Now we know that using Microsoft Office 2003 we lose the Microsoft Photo
Editor. Since we do not have that the directions of inserting a JPEG
OLE object in an Access 2003 database on a form as an image will not
work. For we do not have the option of choosing Microsoft Photo Editor
because we do not have Microsoft Photo Editor in Microsoft Office 2003.
But we do have Microsoft Photo Manager in Microsoft Office 2003. But
the Microsoft Access 2003 team forgot to include that in the Insert
Object... available Object Type.

Therefore Microsoft Access 2003 is less functional then Microsoft Access
97 because Microsoft Office 97 had the Microsoft Photo Editor and
Microsoft Office 2000 and Microsoft Office XP.

I may sound perturbed and I am. I really do not like upgradeing only to
find out that I have downgraded the functionality of an application I
assumed was being upgraded.

Finally I am noticing that if I choose say an Imaging Document then the
ability to open a New file is not available so even if the Microsoft
Photo Editor existed in Microsoft Office 2003 I suspect the directions
would fail at Resolution step 5.

If anyone has a workaround that mimics what the above article was trying
to solve for Access 2003 I would be forever greatfull. Thanks.

 

[George Hester]

Yes I have done that. Of course I had to fix all the associations that got changed by doing that GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. But guess what Stephen it really doesn't work?

I havre a form which will load all jpegs in a folder into an Object Field. But we need to know the path; the extension (it will work with any image file); and finally the OLE class. The last one is the doozy. What is the class for a jpeg file?

Well without Photo Editor the class is Package. Not good. For the icon will show in a different form NOT the image. So after installing Microsoft Photo Editor I now know the class using OLE viewer. The class is MsImager.1 All well and good. So I go back to the form I discussed above and load the path; the extension .jpg; and finally the OLE class MsImager.1. Guess what the table shows? Package. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. It should show Microsoft Photo Editor 3.0. But that can only be done manually as the article I pointed out in my op said was a resolution. If it is done programmatically it does not work.

So I am stuck again. Any suggestion besides give up?

Thanks.