Post #22,127
12/20/01 4:58:37 PM
|
What's different between M$ Access 97 and Access 2000?
In a [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=22108|post] over in another forum, A...hem, Cagle (Kurt?) writes: [Access] 97 may be the end of the line though, since I really hate 2000. Hard to think they could have fucked it up *that* much... But then, [he sez to himself,] consider Word 2000. Ah, yes, I see... [he answers himself.] So what did they do; the same idiotic "Single Document Interface" gimmick as in Word, or what? Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
|
Post #22,129
12/20/01 5:07:09 PM
|
Create this clutter...
I'd rather have a straight SQL interface any day of the week. :-)
I don't use Access much, though I do have to produce a lot of extracts to Access DB's for others to use. The only thing I notice is that Microsoft tried to make my life easier by putting 'Create this' and 'Create that' in the same space as the Tables, Queries, etc. Come one guys, if the user can't figure out the 5 other places to achieve the exact same thing, then adding just one more ain't gonna do the trick. In the meantime, it just clutters up the list of tables.
|
Post #22,138
12/20/01 6:13:59 PM
|
Aha, thanks. Anything more? Anyone else? Cagle...?
|
Post #22,144
12/20/01 6:29:05 PM
|
The difference
They tried to get Access 2000 more modular and they tried to get VBA 2000 more like Visual BASIC. They mucked around with things and added more web support in 2000. 2000 is bloated next to 97. My former employer stuck with 97, because they had over a thousand databases written in 97 that would have been hard to convert. Not just converting tables and queries, but the modules, form code, and ActiveX references. The last three are a doozy. They require some re-refernecing of the ActiveX controls, and re-writing of code in some areas.
"Before Christmas it is 'Ho ho ho', after Christmas it is 'Owe owe owe'" - Santa Norm
|
Post #22,373
12/24/01 11:54:31 AM
|
Erk. Here I am.
Someone else mentioned most of the interface weirdnesses. I don't really like having separate (VB-like) code windows. They Web-bed out the Help system so half the time I just go back to 97 to find help on certain topics. It seems to bomb out a lot more. Plus all osrts of junk doesn't work anymore and I haven't used it enough to figure out what to use instead.
Blech. Every other version of Access bites. I remember for Access 95 there were 3rd parties who would post on their web sites that they couldn't get their products to work with Access 95. So who knows, maybe the next iteration is better.
|
Post #22,438
12/26/01 1:40:38 PM
|
Stupid Help example.
I am trying to get assistance on why I am getting a type mismatch error: Here is the code, BTW: Dim CurrentDB As Database
Set CurrentDB = DBEngine.Workspaces(0).Databases(0)
Dim TempRS As Recordset
Set TempRS = CurrentDB.OpenRecordset("Table1") It doesn't like the last line. Works fine in Access 97. So I go the Access2k's Help system, type in "OpenRecordset", it gives me an "OpenRecordset Method" topic. . . .but no documentation comes up. Nothing comes up for the next topic, "Append method" either. Some topics actually have something, others don't. It's infuriating.
|
Post #22,449
12/26/01 4:22:17 PM
|
DAO/ADO confusion
It would seem there's a RecordSet in the ActiveX Data Objects and a RecordSet in the Data Access Objects. And they aren't compatible, of course. The suggested fix is to declare TempRS as DAO.RecordSet
|
Post #22,493
12/27/01 11:52:06 AM
|
Re: DAO/ADO confusion
Argh.
Although it wouldn't even compile when I didn't have the DAO Object Library referenced. Thankee much, kind sir. Ma'am. Whatever.
|
Post #22,467
12/27/01 12:45:54 AM
|
Now you know why I don't like VBA. :-)
Microsoft got carried away with creating so many object hierarchies that the code gets hard to write.
Wade.
"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
|
Post #22,505
12/27/01 1:10:27 PM
|
Bah!
And now I just tried it on a different MDB and it won't work there.
They must specifically try to screw up their products. No set of developers can actually be that bad.
|
Post #22,562
12/28/01 1:43:05 AM
|
I've never had to set CurrentDB
It's always referenced for me in Access 95/97. So I would rewrite your snippet as simply:
Dim TempRS As Recordset
Set TempRS = CurrentDB.OpenRecordset("Table1")
If that helps. Doesn't fix Help, but hope it helps.
---------------------------------
A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly by the chain of their own ideas;...despair and time eat away the bonds of iron and steel, but they are powerless against the habitual union of ideas, they can only tighten it still more; and on the soft fibres of the brain is founded the unshakable base of the soundest of Empires."
Jacques Servan, 1767
|
Post #22,594
12/28/01 11:41:40 AM
|
I always wondered about that.
I think I figured that out once, but then just kept copying the old code over so it never sunk in.
|
Post #22,156
12/20/01 8:13:48 PM
|
Re: Create this clutter...
That can be turned off in Access 2002, as well as the quasi-SDI taskbar stuff. I wish they'd make the complete jump to SDI in Word and Excel though, not the inconsistent half-assed system they have now.
--
Chris Altmann
|
Post #22,385
12/24/01 7:19:46 PM
|
Here's a few quick differences
Details on request, once I get back home (currently at parents', no labrats here).
1. When it first shipped, it was useless for any multi-user use. Using the simple technique whereby one .mdb has all the tables, and n other[s] have links to those tables as well as any other interface device has been around since Access 1.1, maybe even 1.0. They even give you a jester to set this up now. The problem is that quite frequently, only 1 person can open the UI file at a time. There's a fix for this now, but WTF? How did something that blatant even get past testing? I have seen this with as few as 3 clients.
2. This is subjective, but it sure seems to have a lot more of the once-for-every-record-modal-dialog problems. Anybody who hasn't seen this should count themselves fortunate.
3. There exists a wonderful idea called an ADP. The idea is that you have a file containing UI elements and code, and links to MS SQL server. (I haven't tried it yet with a different database server, but I'll bet a buck it doesn't work with anything other than M$'s product). The difference between this and (1) above is that with this setup, JET is not loaded and is therefore not involved. The problem is that Access cheats with views. Scenario: I have a table t on SQL server, and a view v based on table t. User u is given permission to select from v, but no permission on t. If the owner of t and v is the same, then u should be able to select through v. Now, in an Access ADP file, form f is created and bound to v. The problem is that periodically, Access will, instead of accessing v, try to access t. This fails. I can prove that this is happening by looking at a trace in SQL Profiler. There may be a fix--but, again, WTF? I don't think that Access 97 did this.
I may think of more.
I don't have it in front of me, but I'm pretty sure that the SDI/MDI behavior is configurable somewhere?
|
Post #22,992
1/3/02 2:53:01 PM
|
Re: form f is created and bound to v.
Bound forms are invitations for trouble.
|
