If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Access Runtime:
I just went through an interesting process. I am evaluating a database
built using Access runtime, using the install program provided by the vendor, all went well, apparently it installed the runtime package etc. The application worked fine. But, after I uninstalled their package, my copy of Access 2003 no longer worked, and had to be reinstalled. It would appear the runtime install 'messes' about with the full install of MsAccess program if it is installed. I can see visions of hordes of dis-satisfied users running about with sharp instruments, if a runtime application unscrews their full copy of MsAccess. I would welcome anybody's comments, experience in this area, so I can avoid a repeat of the above. Thanks Ed Warren. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Warren wrote:
I just went through an interesting process. I am evaluating a database built using Access runtime, using the install program provided by the vendor, all went well, apparently it installed the runtime package etc. The application worked fine. But, after I uninstalled their package, my copy of Access 2003 no longer worked, and had to be reinstalled. It would appear the runtime install 'messes' about with the full install of MsAccess program if it is installed. I can see visions of hordes of dis-satisfied users running about with sharp instruments, if a runtime application unscrews their full copy of MsAccess. I would welcome anybody's comments, experience in this area, so I can avoid a repeat of the above. Thanks Ed Warren. I deliver my apps in all versions and never install the runtime on a PC that has Access on it. -- I don't check the Email account attached to this message. Send instead to... RBrandt at Hunter dot com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I would welcome anybody's comments, experience in this area, so I can avoid a repeat of the above. It is important to realize that the runtime is a FULL version of ms-access, with ONLY THE design stuff disabled. So, make no mistake about this concept he You are installing another version of ms-access. That means if you got previous version of ms-access, or all of the MANY problems you have on a machine when two versions are installed will apply to the runtime. In some instances, the a2000 runtime was 150 megs in size, and required a re-boot of your machine. So, do not have ANY fog in your mind: I will repeat: the runtime is a version of ms-access, and the problems you encounter are the SAME as when you install, or put multiple versions of ms-access on a machine. Many companies requite special permissions, or have the IT people install office software, and the would also apply to the ms-access runtime. As the other poster said, you might want to avoid install ms-access on a machine that already has ms-access on it. To do other wise, is to ask for trouble. This advice always applied to regular versions of ms-access, and the runtime are NO different in this respect. (after all, the runtime is compatible, and is in fact the same product - so, why would it be different in this regards?). About the only approach to avoid problems would be to consider sagekey custom installs, you can find them he www.sagekey.com -- Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP) Edmonton, Alberta Canada http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
So, it sounds as if part of the install should be a check to see if the
client machine has access installed, and if so then bypass adding the runtime package. Since there was no check or option in the install program am I correct in saying they missed the boat in building and distributing their application? I want to avoid the case where software built using a previous version of Access runtime (e.g. 97 or 2000) clobbers the installation of MsAccess Full version (which I think happened in the case above). Thanks for the comments. Ed Warren. "Albert D.Kallal" wrote in message ... I would welcome anybody's comments, experience in this area, so I can avoid a repeat of the above. It is important to realize that the runtime is a FULL version of ms-access, with ONLY THE design stuff disabled. So, make no mistake about this concept he You are installing another version of ms-access. That means if you got previous version of ms-access, or all of the MANY problems you have on a machine when two versions are installed will apply to the runtime. In some instances, the a2000 runtime was 150 megs in size, and required a re-boot of your machine. So, do not have ANY fog in your mind: I will repeat: the runtime is a version of ms-access, and the problems you encounter are the SAME as when you install, or put multiple versions of ms-access on a machine. Many companies requite special permissions, or have the IT people install office software, and the would also apply to the ms-access runtime. As the other poster said, you might want to avoid install ms-access on a machine that already has ms-access on it. To do other wise, is to ask for trouble. This advice always applied to regular versions of ms-access, and the runtime are NO different in this respect. (after all, the runtime is compatible, and is in fact the same product - so, why would it be different in this regards?). About the only approach to avoid problems would be to consider sagekey custom installs, you can find them he www.sagekey.com -- Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP) Edmonton, Alberta Canada http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Ed Warren" wrote in message
... So, it sounds as if part of the install should be a check to see if the client machine has access installed, and if so then bypass adding the runtime package. Since there was no check or option in the install program am I correct in saying they missed the boat in building and distributing their application? Yes, or they use a custom install that FORECES the install, and thus they don't have to worry about their applcation not working. If you use the supplied tools (which are not great for commercial installs), the runtime by default does check for a full version, and does not install if present. And, perhaps that install was a different version of ms-access...you don't really know..do you? (and, when it was un-installed, it simply danged your copy). -- Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP) Edmonton, Alberta Canada http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Looking at the install process I'm thinking they used a custom install as
you noted. They are distributing MsAccess 97 /runtime with the application and I think it clobbered my Access 2003 install. In any case, I was able to reinstall and it works fine now. Now, I'm now forwarned and a little smarter. Thanks, Ed Warren. "Albert D.Kallal" wrote in message ... "Ed Warren" wrote in message ... So, it sounds as if part of the install should be a check to see if the client machine has access installed, and if so then bypass adding the runtime package. Since there was no check or option in the install program am I correct in saying they missed the boat in building and distributing their application? Yes, or they use a custom install that FORECES the install, and thus they don't have to worry about their applcation not working. If you use the supplied tools (which are not great for commercial installs), the runtime by default does check for a full version, and does not install if present. And, perhaps that install was a different version of ms-access...you don't really know..do you? (and, when it was un-installed, it simply danged your copy). -- Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP) Edmonton, Alberta Canada http://www.members.shaw.ca/AlbertKallal |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Access 2003 Developer Extension | JIM.H. | General Discussion | 10 | May 1st, 2005 05:13 PM |
starting access 97 | Edward Letendre | General Discussion | 2 | January 26th, 2005 02:15 AM |
Changing from 98 to XP workstations, will Access runtime work? | Gregg Hill | General Discussion | 5 | December 24th, 2004 04:02 PM |
is Access 2003 any better than XP? | Gorb | General Discussion | 4 | November 11th, 2004 09:44 PM |
is Access 2003 any better than XP? | Gorb | Using Forms | 2 | November 11th, 2004 09:20 AM |