有关将97运行时应用程序升级到2003的建议 [英] Advice on upgrading 97 runtime app to 2003
问题描述
我有一个由150多个客户使用的Access应用程序。我用
开发97，转换为2000并分发为97或2000 mde，或97
运行时。这限制了我97个功能。我的客户可以使用
Access 97,2000,2002,2003或97运行时中的任何一个。
所以我不会徘徊太远，我正在考虑使用2000文件格式在
Access 2000+中使用2000文件格式进行开发。 （我知道我需要使用A2000来创建mde。）
那么我的97和97运行时用户呢？考虑
为这些人分发2003运行时是否合理，并且完全留下97
？你能预见到这个问题吗？ （我必须说我的97
运行时应用程序运行最好的所有版本。）对于拥有零售版本的Access 97的客户，是否有任何
问题，不得不
安装2003运行时来运行我的应用程序？或者我应该分发一个2000
运行时。我有2000 Dev版本，但从未使用过这样的
由于极其聪明的各种问题而且
这个新闻组的慷慨捐助者。
另外，我一直在使用97安装向导来分发应用程序。我很想b $ b计划很快转到QSetup
（ http://www.pantaray.com/qsetup.html) 。我知道2003年运行时需要2003 VSTools
，但是我需要使用P& D向导创建运行时文件
？我可以使用VS函数来创建运行时，然后使用QSetup打包这些吗？
Owen Jenkins
" Owen Jenkins" < oj@healthbase.com.au>在消息中写道
news：43 *********************** @ news.optusnet.com.a u ... < blockquote class =post_quotes>我有一个由150多个客户使用的Access应用程序。我开发在
97，转换为2000并分发为97或2000 mde，或97运行时。这个
限制了我97个功能。
你能列出你真正想念的97个特定功能吗？
（只是好奇）
我的客户可以使用任何Access 97,2000,2002,2003或97运行时之一。
正是我做的。工作得很好不是吗？
所以我不会徘徊太远，我想在2003年开发，
使用2000文件格式并分发2000用于Access 2000+用户的mde。
（我知道我需要使用A2000来创建mde。）那么我的97和/或97运行时用户呢？考虑为这些人分发2003运行时是否合理，并完全抛弃97？你能预见到这个问题吗？ （我必须说我的97运行时应用程序在所有版本中运行得最好。）
一点也不惊讶。这也是我的经验。
目前使用97（运行时或零售版）的用户可能会有一个版本的
Windows不能运行你必须拥有Windows 2000（SP3？）或更高版本才能运行2003年的b $ b。你是否会要求他们升级他们的操作系统？对于某些人来说，
可能意味着还需要新的硬件。
如果客户有零售版本的Access
97，必须安装2003运行时运行我的应用程序？
你的应用程序会踩到Access 97的脚趾。最明显的事情是运行你的应用程序后双击MDB将尝试使用2003
运行时而不是Access 97.他们将不得不学习打开首先访问97
，然后从那里指定文件。大不了？很难说。很多人在他们的PC上拥有许可版本的Access甚至从未打开它。
这些人不会被打扰。
或者我应该分发2000运行时。我有2000 Dev版本，但由于这个新闻组的极其聪明和慷慨的贡献者所发现的各种问题，因此从未使用过它。
2000运行时解决了使用2003运行时引起的一些问题。
它至少可以在更多版本的Windows上运行（但是很麻烦）。
另外，我一直在使用97安装向导来分发应用程序。我计划尽快转到QSetup（ http：/ /www.pantaray.com/qsetup.html）。我知道我会在2003年运行时需要2003 VSTools，但是我需要使用P& D />向导创建运行时文件？我可以使用VS函数来创建运行时，然后使用QSetup打包它们吗？
对不起，不能帮你解决这个问题。 />
只是我的意见，但在分发给不同的目标群体时，你现在正在做什么。提供97运行时，97 MDE和2000 MDE，让用户选择适当的
是最好的方法。您可以在任何32位Windows框上运行
，并可以为任何版本的Access提供服务。
我将应用程序分发给近300名用户类似的各种硬件，操作系统，
和Office安装（或不安装），这个设置没有问题。
-
我请勿查看此邮件附带的电子邮件帐户
。发送给... ...
在Hunter dot com的RBrandt
Owen Jenkins写道：
所以我不会徘徊太远，我想在2003年开发，使用2000文件格式并为Access 2000+的用户分发2000 mde。 （我知道我需要使用A2000来创建mde。）那么我的97和97运行时用户呢？
怎么样？花圈还是一个漂亮的百合花？
感谢您的评论。
因为我在97年开发，我避风港实际上太多使用了2000+。我在用户界面中遗漏的主要内容是条件格式，
这对我的应用程序非常有用。代码方面，我认为文件系统
对象会非常方便。我的97应用程序使用函数调用打开文件夹
对话框等。
只是我的意见，但在分发给不同的目标群体时你是什么？ >目前正在做;提供97运行时，97 MDE和2000 MDE并让用户选择适当的最佳方式。您可以在任何32位Windows机器上运行，并且可以为任何版本的Access提供服务。
我将应用程序分发给近300名用户，使用类似的各种硬件，操作系统，<和/或安装了Office（或没有），这个设置没有问题。
这就是为什么我还没有离开97。也许我应该坚持下去
目前。我只是有点担心使用旧技术。
Owen
I have an Access application that is being used by 150+ clients. I
develop in 97, convert to 2000 and distribute as a 97 or 2000 mde, or 97
runtime. This limits me to 97 functions. My clients may use any one of
Access 97, 2000, 2002, 2003 or 97 runtime.
So that I''m not lingering too far behind, I''m thinking of developing in
2003, using 2000 file format and distributing a 2000 mde for users of
Access 2000+. (I understand I''ll need to use A2000 to create the mde.)
So what about my 97 and 97 runtime users? Is it reasonable to consider
distributing a 2003 runtime for these people, and leaving 97 behind
entirely? Can you forsee problems with this? (I must say that my 97
runtime application runs best of all versions.) Would there be any
problems with clients who have a retail version of Access 97, having to
install the 2003 runtime to run my app? Or should I distribute a 2000
runtime.I have the 2000 Dev edition, but have never used it as such
owing to the various issues identified by the extremely clever and
generous contributers to this newsgroup.
Also, I''ve been using the 97 setup wizard for distributing apps. I''m
planning to go over to QSetup soon
(http://www.pantaray.com/qsetup.html). I know I''ll need the 2003 VSTools
for the 2003 runtime, but will I need to use the P & D wizard to create
the runtime files? Can I use the VS functions to create the runtime,
then package these with QSetup?
Owen Jenkins
"Owen Jenkins" <oj@healthbase.com.au> wrote in message
news:43***********************@news.optusnet.com.a u...I have an Access application that is being used by 150+ clients. I develop in
97, convert to 2000 and distribute as a 97 or 2000 mde, or 97 runtime. This
limits me to 97 functions.
Can you list the specific post 97 functions that you really miss?
(just curious)
My clients may use any one of Access 97, 2000, 2002, 2003 or 97 runtime.
Exactly what I do. Works great doesn''t it?
So that I''m not lingering too far behind, I''m thinking of developing in 2003,
using 2000 file format and distributing a 2000 mde for users of Access 2000+.
(I understand I''ll need to use A2000 to create the mde.) So what about my 97
and 97 runtime users? Is it reasonable to consider distributing a 2003 runtime
for these people, and leaving 97 behind entirely? Can you forsee problems with
this? (I must say that my 97 runtime application runs best of all versions.)
Not at all suprised. That is my experience as well.
Users currently using 97 (runtime or retail) might very well have a version of
Windows that won''t run 2003. You have to have Windows 2000 (SP3?) or higher to
run 2003. Are you going to ask them to upgrade their OS as well? For some that
might mean new hardware is also required.
Would there be any problems with clients who have a retail version of Access
97, having to install the 2003 runtime to run my app?
Your app will step on the toes of Access 97 a bit. The most noticeable thing is
that double-clicking an MDB after running your app will attempt to use the 2003
runtime instead of Access 97. They will have to learn to open Access 97 first
and then specify the file from there. Big deal? Hard to say. Many people who
have the licensed version of Access on their PCs have never even opened it.
Those people would not be bothered.
Or should I distribute a 2000 runtime.I have the 2000 Dev edition, but have
never used it as such owing to the various issues identified by the extremely
clever and generous contributers to this newsgroup.
The 2000 runtime solves some of the problems caused by using the 2003 runtime.
It at least runs on more versions of Windows (but is buggier).
Also, I''ve been using the 97 setup wizard for distributing apps. I''m planning
to go over to QSetup soon (http://www.pantaray.com/qsetup.html). I know I''ll
need the 2003 VSTools for the 2003 runtime, but will I need to use the P & D
wizard to create the runtime files? Can I use the VS functions to create the
runtime, then package these with QSetup?
Sorry, can''t help you with that.
Just my opinion, but when distributing to a diverse target group what you are
currently doing; offering the 97 runtime, a 97 MDE and a 2000 MDE and letting
the user choose as appropriate is the best way to go. You are able to run on
any 32 bit Windows box, and can service any version of Access that is out there.
I distribute an app to almost 300 users with a similar variety of hardware, OS,
and Office installed (or not) and have had zero problems with this setup.
--
I don''t check the Email account attached
to this message. Send instead to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Owen Jenkins wrote:
So that I''m not lingering too far behind, I''m thinking of developing in
2003, using 2000 file format and distributing a 2000 mde for users of
Access 2000+. (I understand I''ll need to use A2000 to create the mde.)
So what about my 97 and 97 runtime users?
How about a wreath or a nice lily?
Thanks for your comments.
Because I develop in 97, I haven''t actually used 2000+ too much. The
main thing I''m missing in the user interface is conditional formatting,
which would be very useful to my app. Code-wise, I think the File System
Object would be very handy. My 97 app uses function calls to open folder
dialogs etc.
Just my opinion, but when distributing to a diverse target group what you are
currently doing; offering the 97 runtime, a 97 MDE and a 2000 MDE and letting
the user choose as appropriate is the best way to go. You are able to run on
any 32 bit Windows box, and can service any version of Access that is out there.
I distribute an app to almost 300 users with a similar variety of hardware, OS,
and Office installed (or not) and have had zero problems with this setup.
This is why I haven''t moved from 97 yet. Maybe I should stick with it
for the present. I''m just a bit worried about using ''old technology''.
Owen
这篇关于有关将97运行时应用程序升级到2003的建议的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
