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
|
|||
|
|||
historically ancient software
here's a really tricky question.
I am using office professional for windows 95 with word 2000. all programs on my computer are working appropriately except in that none of them are acknowledging each other but word. it recognizes all programs on the computer. access will work only until I try to create a database then it notes an error in the program and shuts down all together. my computer is a Compaq Presario with windows xp loaded as it's operating system. how can I get my programs to interact with each other? and more so, how can I get access to function properly??? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Hi.
You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. Microsoft Access 95 was the buggiest retail version of Access to date. Because of this, the company I work for converts Access databases for customers to every version, except Access 95. My recommendation is to uninstall Microsoft Office 95, then install a later version of Microsoft Office. While that costs money, one needs to ask, "Isn't my time spent struggling with software that doesn't work worth more than the cost of the new Office suite software and it's installation?" Even Office 97 Pro will give you a great deal more application integration than Office 95 installed on a Window 95 computer. HTH. Gunny See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs. See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips. (Please remove ZERO_SPAM from my reply E-mail address, so that a message will be forwarded to me.) "MarkAnthony Simmons" wrote in message ... here's a really tricky question. I am using office professional for windows 95 with word 2000. all programs on my computer are working appropriately except in that none of them are acknowledging each other but word. it recognizes all programs on the computer. access will work only until I try to create a database then it notes an error in the program and shuts down all together. my computer is a Compaq Presario with windows xp loaded as it's operating system. how can I get my programs to interact with each other? and more so, how can I get access to function properly??? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"'69 Camaro" AM wrote in
message ... Hi. You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. Actually, it was Excel that had its act together. Word 95 still used WordBasic instead of VBA. Access 95 was\is extremely buggy. Access can in no way talk to a later version of Word, or any other Office application since they have no way of knowing about anything written later. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. I have 3 versions of Office (both 16 and 32 bit) running on the same machine. Others have more than that. There is even a Knowledge Base article on some of the issues: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;292491 Microsoft Access 95 was the buggiest retail version of Access to date. Because of this, the company I work for converts Access databases for customers to every version, except Access 95. I'd have to agree with that statement. My recommendation is to uninstall Microsoft Office 95, then install a later version of Microsoft Office. While that costs money, one needs to ask, "Isn't my time spent struggling with software that doesn't work worth more than the cost of the new Office suite software and it's installation?" Even Office 97 Pro will give you a great deal more application integration than Office 95 installed on a Window 95 computer. I also agree with this statement. I only have 1 machine that still has Office 95 on it. I haven't had a call to use it in almost 3 years. -- Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP Microsoft Access Free Access downloads: http://www.datastrat.com http://www.mvps.org/access |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Hi, Arvin.
You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. Oh, it runs. It was the crashes that we found annoying. We had a problem with Office 95 applications freezing or crashing an average of 5 times per day (mostly Access). Fortunately, the Windows XP operating system is much more stable, so it doesn't need to be rebooted when Office 95 applications die, like Windows 95 does. It provides memory protection, a wider range of memory addressing, and many, many other capabilities that weren't available in Windows 95. And since the operating system isn't relevant, have you got any helpful hints on how to get Office 95 to work with Windows XP's: -- NTFS permissions that prevent a Windows user account which lacks Administrator or Power User security permissions from using some of the Office 95 files that are automatically installed in the protected Windows System directories -- API functions that use call-backs -- .Net 1.1 Framework -- settings for automatic Office updates -- built-in firewall -- missing Jet 3.0 components from MDAC -- security settings for the Windows Registry Keys -- and any other NIMBY's? Just kidding. ;-) I know the answers are "fuhgeddaboudit" and "nevuhgunnahappen"! 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. Actually, it was Excel that had its act together. We had a lot more success with Borland's C++ compiler using OLE with Microsoft Word documents than with Microsoft Excel spreadsheets when we were programming during Office 95's heyday. We never used WordBasic, because we were C and C++ programmers, so we may have been more successful if we'd used the right tool for the job. IIRC using the OLE model to copy/paste into Word 95 documents was more flexible on different types of objects from other Windows applications than was Excel 95. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. I have 3 versions of Office (both 16 and 32 bit) running on the same machine. Others have more than that. I quoted Microsoft's recommendation on not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=290576), but my company is just as guilty as most, because there just aren't enough computers available for each developer in our office to place only a single version of Office on each computer. There is even a Knowledge Base article on some of the issues: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;292491 Good info. Thanks! HTH. Gunny See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs. See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips. (Please remove ZERO_SPAM from my reply E-mail address, so that a message will be forwarded to me.) "Arvin Meyer" wrote in message ... "'69 Camaro" AM wrote in message ... Hi. You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. Actually, it was Excel that had its act together. Word 95 still used WordBasic instead of VBA. Access 95 was\is extremely buggy. Access can in no way talk to a later version of Word, or any other Office application since they have no way of knowing about anything written later. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. I have 3 versions of Office (both 16 and 32 bit) running on the same machine. Others have more than that. There is even a Knowledge Base article on some of the issues: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;292491 Microsoft Access 95 was the buggiest retail version of Access to date. Because of this, the company I work for converts Access databases for customers to every version, except Access 95. I'd have to agree with that statement. My recommendation is to uninstall Microsoft Office 95, then install a later version of Microsoft Office. While that costs money, one needs to ask, "Isn't my time spent struggling with software that doesn't work worth more than the cost of the new Office suite software and its installation?" Even Office 97 Pro will give you a great deal more application integration than Office 95 installed on a Windows 95 computer. I also agree with this statement. I only have 1 machine that still has Office 95 on it. I haven't had a call to use it in almost 3 years. -- Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP Microsoft Access Free Access downloads: http://www.datastrat.com http://www.mvps.org/access |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
You seem to have had more luck than me with WordBasic OLE objects.
I used WordBasic. I liked WordBasic. But my opinion was that GetObject, CreateObject, Quit and Nothing didn't really work they way they should for WordBasic -- not the way I thought the documentation for Get and Create suggested, not the way other objects worked. And I rewrote all the Get/Create/Quit code when I moved to using Word Application objects. BTW, one of the features XP provides is a Win95 compatibility layer. Is that of any value? Also I note that (1) A97 on Win2K shares many of the same problems you list regarding XP security settings, and (2) 'designed for Win95' is a bit of a stretch. Considering how obviously even A97 retained links with Win3.1 and Office 6, 'Recompiled for Win32' might have been closer to the truth... (david) "'69 Camaro" AM wrote in message ... Hi, Arvin. You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. Oh, it runs. It was the crashes that we found annoying. We had a problem with Office 95 applications freezing or crashing an average of 5 times per day (mostly Access). Fortunately, the Windows XP operating system is much more stable, so it doesn't need to be rebooted when Office 95 applications die, like Windows 95 does. It provides memory protection, a wider range of memory addressing, and many, many other capabilities that weren't available in Windows 95. And since the operating system isn't relevant, have you got any helpful hints on how to get Office 95 to work with Windows XP's: -- NTFS permissions that prevent a Windows user account which lacks Administrator or Power User security permissions from using some of the Office 95 files that are automatically installed in the protected Windows System directories -- API functions that use call-backs -- .Net 1.1 Framework -- settings for automatic Office updates -- built-in firewall -- missing Jet 3.0 components from MDAC -- security settings for the Windows Registry Keys -- and any other NIMBY's? Just kidding. ;-) I know the answers are "fuhgeddaboudit" and "nevuhgunnahappen"! 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. Actually, it was Excel that had its act together. We had a lot more success with Borland's C++ compiler using OLE with Microsoft Word documents than with Microsoft Excel spreadsheets when we were programming during Office 95's heyday. We never used WordBasic, because we were C and C++ programmers, so we may have been more successful if we'd used the right tool for the job. IIRC using the OLE model to copy/paste into Word 95 documents was more flexible on different types of objects from other Windows applications than was Excel 95. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. I have 3 versions of Office (both 16 and 32 bit) running on the same machine. Others have more than that. I quoted Microsoft's recommendation on not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=290576), but my company is just as guilty as most, because there just aren't enough computers available for each developer in our office to place only a single version of Office on each computer. There is even a Knowledge Base article on some of the issues: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;292491 Good info. Thanks! HTH. Gunny See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs. See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips. (Please remove ZERO_SPAM from my reply E-mail address, so that a message will be forwarded to me.) "Arvin Meyer" wrote in message ... "'69 Camaro" AM wrote in message ... Hi. You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. Actually, it was Excel that had its act together. Word 95 still used WordBasic instead of VBA. Access 95 was\is extremely buggy. Access can in no way talk to a later version of Word, or any other Office application since they have no way of knowing about anything written later. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. I have 3 versions of Office (both 16 and 32 bit) running on the same machine. Others have more than that. There is even a Knowledge Base article on some of the issues: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;292491 Microsoft Access 95 was the buggiest retail version of Access to date. Because of this, the company I work for converts Access databases for customers to every version, except Access 95. I'd have to agree with that statement. My recommendation is to uninstall Microsoft Office 95, then install a later version of Microsoft Office. While that costs money, one needs to ask, "Isn't my time spent struggling with software that doesn't work worth more than the cost of the new Office suite software and its installation?" Even Office 97 Pro will give you a great deal more application integration than Office 95 installed on a Windows 95 computer. I also agree with this statement. I only have 1 machine that still has Office 95 on it. I haven't had a call to use it in almost 3 years. -- Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP Microsoft Access Free Access downloads: http://www.datastrat.com http://www.mvps.org/access |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Hi, David.
BTW, one of the features XP provides is a Win95 compatibility layer. Is that of any value? I would certainly think so. But the customer had standardization rules that wouldn't allow us to make changes to their standard computer configurations, not even to make them work better with our applications, so we didn't get to test this. (2) 'designed for Win95' is a bit of a stretch. LOL! I am not making this up. This is verbatim from the company. The CD case reads: "Microsoft(R) Office Professional & Bookshelf(R) Designed for Windows(R) 95." The top left corner has the Windows 95 logo with the "Designed for Microsoft(R) Windows(R) 95" message on it, too, just in case we missed the larger lettering on the front. Nowhere on the case or the on CD's does it say "Microsoft Office 95," just "Office Professional version 7.0/Bookshelf 1995 edition" in tiny lettering on the back of the case and nearly identical wording on the CD's to indicate which version it is. In all other references to the product, it's "Designed for Windows(R) 95." 'Recompiled for Win32' might have been closer to the truth... True. Thankfully, it's evolved into an a suite of applications that are far more stable and much more integrated (even if more bloated), than the '95 version. Gunny See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs. See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips. (Please remove ZERO_SPAM from my reply E-mail address, so that a message will be forwarded to me.) "david epsom dot com dot au" david@epsomdotcomdotau wrote in message ... You seem to have had more luck than me with WordBasic OLE objects. I used WordBasic. I liked WordBasic. But my opinion was that GetObject, CreateObject, Quit and Nothing didn't really work they way they should for WordBasic -- not the way I thought the documentation for Get and Create suggested, not the way other objects worked. And I rewrote all the Get/Create/Quit code when I moved to using Word Application objects. BTW, one of the features XP provides is a Win95 compatibility layer. Is that of any value? Also I note that (1) A97 on Win2K shares many of the same problems you list regarding XP security settings, and (2) 'designed for Win95' is a bit of a stretch. Considering how obviously even A97 retained links with Win3.1 and Office 6, 'Recompiled for Win32' might have been closer to the truth... (david) "'69 Camaro" AM wrote in message ... Hi, Arvin. You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. Oh, it runs. It was the crashes that we found annoying. We had a problem with Office 95 applications freezing or crashing an average of 5 times per day (mostly Access). Fortunately, the Windows XP operating system is much more stable, so it doesn't need to be rebooted when Office 95 applications die, like Windows 95 does. It provides memory protection, a wider range of memory addressing, and many, many other capabilities that weren't available in Windows 95. And since the operating system isn't relevant, have you got any helpful hints on how to get Office 95 to work with Windows XP's: -- NTFS permissions that prevent a Windows user account which lacks Administrator or Power User security permissions from using some of the Office 95 files that are automatically installed in the protected Windows System directories -- API functions that use call-backs -- .Net 1.1 Framework -- settings for automatic Office updates -- built-in firewall -- missing Jet 3.0 components from MDAC -- security settings for the Windows Registry Keys -- and any other NIMBY's? Just kidding. ;-) I know the answers are "fuhgeddaboudit" and "nevuhgunnahappen"! 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. Actually, it was Excel that had its act together. We had a lot more success with Borland's C++ compiler using OLE with Microsoft Word documents than with Microsoft Excel spreadsheets when we were programming during Office 95's heyday. We never used WordBasic, because we were C and C++ programmers, so we may have been more successful if we'd used the right tool for the job. IIRC using the OLE model to copy/paste into Word 95 documents was more flexible on different types of objects from other Windows applications than was Excel 95. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. I have 3 versions of Office (both 16 and 32 bit) running on the same machine. Others have more than that. I quoted Microsoft's recommendation on not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=290576), but my company is just as guilty as most, because there just aren't enough computers available for each developer in our office to place only a single version of Office on each computer. There is even a Knowledge Base article on some of the issues: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;292491 Good info. Thanks! HTH. Gunny See http://www.QBuilt.com for all your database needs. See http://www.Access.QBuilt.com for Microsoft Access tips. (Please remove ZERO_SPAM from my reply E-mail address, so that a message will be forwarded to me.) "Arvin Meyer" wrote in message ... "'69 Camaro" AM wrote in message ... Hi. You likely have some incompatibility problems: 1.) Microsoft Office Pro 95 was designed for Windows 95 (which is MS DOS-based), not Windows XP (which is NT-based). Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. 2.) Applications in Microsoft Office Pro 95 were not well-integrated with one another, even though it was marketed as an "integrated office productivity suite." Microsoft Word was the best integrated application in the suite, due to better OLE handling than the other applications. Actually, it was Excel that had its act together. Word 95 still used WordBasic instead of VBA. Access 95 was\is extremely buggy. Access can in no way talk to a later version of Word, or any other Office application since they have no way of knowing about anything written later. 3.) Microsoft recommends not installing more than one version of Office on the same computer, since there can be conflicts between the different versions. I have 3 versions of Office (both 16 and 32 bit) running on the same machine. Others have more than that. There is even a Knowledge Base article on some of the issues: http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;292491 Microsoft Access 95 was the buggiest retail version of Access to date. Because of this, the company I work for converts Access databases for customers to every version, except Access 95. I'd have to agree with that statement. My recommendation is to uninstall Microsoft Office 95, then install a later version of Microsoft Office. While that costs money, one needs to ask, "Isn't my time spent struggling with software that doesn't work worth more than the cost of the new Office suite software and its installation?" Even Office 97 Pro will give you a great deal more application integration than Office 95 installed on a Windows 95 computer. I also agree with this statement. I only have 1 machine that still has Office 95 on it. I haven't had a call to use it in almost 3 years. -- Arvin Meyer, MCP, MVP Microsoft Access Free Access downloads: http://www.datastrat.com http://www.mvps.org/access |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:26:00 -0700, "'69 Camaro"
AM wrote: Not relevant. Office 95 runs on an XP computer. Oh, it runs. It was the crashes that we found annoying. We had a problem with Office 95 applications freezing or crashing an average of 5 times per day (mostly Access). Just to note... this probably isn't operating system dependent. Access7.0 aka Access95 was notoriously the WORST version of Access ever released; it was well known for frequent crashes, BSOD's and corruption, to the extent that I refused to install it on my machine at all, and insisted that one customer upgrade to A97 (probably the best version released) before I'd work on their databases. John W. Vinson[MVP] (no longer chatting for now) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I need to register my software. | Jim May | Setup, Installing & Configuration | 3 | August 14th, 2004 06:08 PM |
Loading Old software on new PC. | Daniel | General Discussions | 2 | August 13th, 2004 04:02 AM |
Removing an embedded document | Bill Turner | General Discussion | 4 | July 11th, 2004 11:50 PM |
Third party software for contact management | Michelle | General Discussion | 4 | July 2nd, 2004 03:21 PM |
lost software | Parker Reinhardt | General Discussions | 2 | May 30th, 2004 05:01 PM |