I agree Bob.
From: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert Peterson
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:54 PM
To: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [MS_AccessPros] Re: MS_Access_Professionals
Yes I was aware I was addressing two different aspects. And I agree that the developer needs to develop using the version that the end user will use. Most users do not need the full version of Access. This is when it is up to us to provide the proper run time.
The cross version issues would happen if an application is provided then somehow changed by the end user using the incorrect version. I realize there are scenarios that a "customer" may want to be able to make seemingly minor modifications to a database. Maybe create a simple report we haven't provided. They figure since the bought Office Pro they have Access and should be able to do this. They and the primary developers need to be aware of the version issues in this case. It comes down to communication between all parties involved and a clear set of project requirements.
Bob Peterson
From: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 11:42 AM
To: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [MS_AccessPros] Re: MS_Access_Professionals
Bob,
You are addressing two different aspects here, Development and Production. During development, "controlling the front end version using the runtime" isn't really an option
As far as I know the problem comes with developing the application in a newer version that the target production version. A team of developers, as you say, should all use the same version. This version should be the "lowest common denominator" of the target user. If you intend to control frontend version using the runtime then it would be best to develop using the same version as the runtime that is or will be deployed.
Glenn
From: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert Peterson
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 11:29 AM
To: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [MS_AccessPros] Re: MS_Access_Professionals
If the client computers have different versions of Access then I would use SQL Express as the back end.
And, if I am using SQL express as the back end I would control the front end version by using the runtime.
If there is a team of developers then they all should use the same version of Access, especially if they are using the same back-end.
Does this seem like common sense to you, if not best practice?
Bob Peterson
From: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 11:04 AM
To: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [MS_AccessPros] Re: MS_Access_Professionals
I learned that one version's ability to open and save an earlier version's file format is in invitation to disaster. At the time I was trying to develop a 2003 application using 2010. I had to constantly compact and repair and decompile. I have since moved to using a virtual machine for each version I need to develop in. 2010 is my main development environment at the moment so I don't use a virtual machine for it, mainly so that I can use dual monitors.
Glenn
From: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Liz Ravenwood
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 10:56 AM
To: 'MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [MS_AccessPros] Re: MS_Access_Professionals
If we open a 2007 database with 2010 and then try to open again with 2010, it is hosed.
From: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim Wagner
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 6:17 AM
To: MS_Access_Professionals@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [MS_AccessPros] Re: MS_Access_Professionals
Even though all of us are on 2010, we still encounter ghost issues that cannot be explained. We do have some mdb's and mostly accdb's. We have slowly moved them over. Sometimes we just shrug our shoulders and move on.
Jim Wagner
On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 11:25 PM, "buffalome000@yahoo.com" <buffalome000@yahoo.com> wrote:
Greetings, I often don't feel qualified to contribute answer/solution to this group, but on this issue I can offer a recent first hand example. We have a large organization predominantly on ACCESS 2007, the organization is attempting migration to 2010. We had 2007 and 2010 both installed on 4 machines. We were givent assurance by both local MS and our I.T. group that this would "be ok". We also experienced the problem responded to earlier that you could accidentally open up the wrong version. LONG story short, we thought we were in the clear after 10 days of testing until unexplained things began happening, eventually led to MS ACCESS applications and DB's hopelessly corupted. We had those 4 machines re-imaged back to 2007 to get rid of all 2010 compinents, We will NOT embark on this effort again until everyone goes up on 2010 or 2013 with synchronization. It was a nightmare.
Terence
This email (and all attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain privileged and/or proprietary information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (12) |
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar