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
|
|||
|
|||
New Access Version?
Does anyone know if a new version of Access is due to come out anytime soon?
Thanks, Neil |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Neil,
I know the Microsoft team is hard at work on the next version, since I've had the privilege of being on a small team of users that gets to preview new features and provide input. However, I have not heard of any anticipated RTM (Release to Manufacturing) schedule yet. Tom _________________________________ "Neil Ginsberg" wrote in message nk.net... Does anyone know if a new version of Access is due to come out anytime soon? Thanks, Neil |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks Tom. We're using A2000 now and are considering upgrading to A2003.
Any thoughts on that, as opposed to waiting for the next version? Neil "Tom Wickerath" wrote in message ... Hi Neil, I know the Microsoft team is hard at work on the next version, since I've had the privilege of being on a small team of users that gets to preview new features and provide input. However, I have not heard of any anticipated RTM (Release to Manufacturing) schedule yet. Tom _________________________________ "Neil Ginsberg" wrote in message nk.net... Does anyone know if a new version of Access is due to come out anytime soon? Thanks, Neil |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:46:49 GMT, "Neil Ginsberg" wrote:
Thanks Tom. We're using A2000 now and are considering upgrading to A2003. Any thoughts on that, as opposed to waiting for the next version? Neil Access 2003 offers no compelling improvements over Access 2002(XP). If you are using Access 2002, I would not bother upgrading right now unless you were upgrading MS Office anyway. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I wrote we're using Access 2000, not 2002. I agree re. 2002/2003.
Neil "Steve Jorgensen" wrote in message ... On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:46:49 GMT, "Neil Ginsberg" wrote: Thanks Tom. We're using A2000 now and are considering upgrading to A2003. Any thoughts on that, as opposed to waiting for the next version? Neil Access 2003 offers no compelling improvements over Access 2002(XP). If you are using Access 2002, I would not bother upgrading right now unless you were upgrading MS Office anyway. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Neil Ginsberg" wrote in message news I wrote we're using Access 2000, not 2002. I agree re. 2002/2003. Neil, I haven't seen anything new and great since A97. (A2 was 16 bit and A95 was a piece of junk.) I keep upgrading because all my customers upgrade. I think A97 was a real breakthrough in reliability. I'm not particularly impressed with ADO, the ASP pages or any of this newer stuff. Unless you have a specific reason to upgrade I would suggest that you stay with what you have. There have been some nice incremental improvements. For example, if you change the name of a query, and you have a report based on that query, the report will automatically updated to reflect the changed name. That's a nice feature -- renaming objects used to be so difficult. (There are some drawbacks too. The name game is best avoided.) Mike |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Turco" wrote in message news:lw3Hd.8274$nt.1238@fed1read06... "Neil Ginsberg" wrote in message news I wrote we're using Access 2000, not 2002. I agree re. 2002/2003. Neil, I haven't seen anything new and great since A97. (A2 was 16 bit and A95 was a piece of junk.) I keep upgrading because all my customers upgrade. I agree re. A97. I think A97 was a real breakthrough in reliability. I'm not particularly impressed with ADO, the ASP pages or any of this newer stuff. Unless you have a specific reason to upgrade I would suggest that you stay with what you have. One concern is that A2000 is now 5 years old, and MS won't support things indefinitely. As new OS's come out, more and more the older software becomes incompatible. We are looking to revamp our DB, so it seems a good time to upgrade and do it in a newer version, even though, yeah, there's no real compelling reason. There have been some nice incremental improvements. For example, if you change the name of a query, and you have a report based on that query, the report will automatically updated to reflect the changed name. I have another client who likes to fiddle around with the database, mostly re. reports and some form formatting. He's notorious for renaming objects as he thinks of a better name. Drives me crazy! For that reason alone, it would be worth switching to A2003! :-) That's a nice feature -- renaming objects used to be so difficult. (There are some drawbacks too. The name game is best avoided.) Name game? Thanks, Neil Mike |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Turco" wrote:
For example, if you change the name of a query, and you have a report based on that query, the report will automatically updated to reflect the changed name. That's a nice feature -- renaming objects used to be so difficult. This in itself is problematic. Have a look at this: http://members.iinet.net.au/~allenbrowne/ser-48.html Regards, Keith. www.keithwilby.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Turco wrote:
"Neil Ginsberg" wrote in message news I wrote we're using Access 2000, not 2002. I agree re. 2002/2003. Neil, I haven't seen anything new and great since A97. (A2 was 16 bit and A95 was a piece of junk.) I keep upgrading because all my customers upgrade. I think A97 was a real breakthrough in reliability. I'm not particularly impressed with ADO, the ASP pages or any of this newer stuff. Unless you have a specific reason to upgrade I would suggest that you stay with what you have. There have been some nice incremental improvements. For example, if you change the name of a query, and you have a report based on that query, the report will automatically updated to reflect the changed name. That's a nice feature -- renaming objects used to be so difficult. (There are some drawbacks too. The name game is best avoided.) The dreaded Name Autocorrect feature, would be nice if it weren't so bug ridden. -- This sig left intentionally blank |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:11:02 -0800, "Mike Turco"
wrote: "Neil Ginsberg" wrote in message news I wrote we're using Access 2000, not 2002. I agree re. 2002/2003. Neil, I haven't seen anything new and great since A97. (A2 was 16 bit and A95 was a piece of junk.) I keep upgrading because all my customers upgrade. If you do a lot of VBA coding, there are some improvements that I now find it hard to do without when working in A97. Custom events, custom enumerated types, and CallByName, to name a few. Also, having the VBE in a separate window, though initially annoying, shows its value the first time you debug code behind a modal form. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Running Spanish Access application into English version | Joseph | New Users | 0 | December 15th, 2004 10:15 AM |
Is MS Access XP Version compatible to Visual Basic 6 ? | rock72 | General Discussion | 2 | December 6th, 2004 06:42 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 |
Access XP Compared to Access 2003 | Mardene Leahu | New Users | 1 | October 1st, 2004 05:11 AM |