I am responsible for maintaining an access database application that has several forms, queries, modules, etc. It also uses an ActiveX tree view control. It is a split design with the data tables stored in a common server directory and each user with a front end copy on their machine.
My machine has always had MS Access 2000 on it but all of the people who use the database are on Access 2003 SP2
Is anyone aware of any issues or concerns I might experience if I was to install 2003 on my machine as well?
My rule of thumb, especially if I am distributing an mde, is always develop using the lowest version (including SPs) used by any client.
If you are not 100% certain what the very lowest version any client is using you can trap the version and write it to table (http://www.everythingaccess.com/tuto...sCmd-Functions - sysCmd(715)). I used to use this so I could identify anyone who had fallen through the net and was using an earlier version than we expected.
As far as having two different versions of Access on the same computer, there should be NO PROBLEM do so. Ops, be sure to install them in the order they were release. That is, be sure to install Access 2000 before installing Access 2002 or 2003. Be sure to install Access 2002 before installing 2003.
Do NOT try to mix 2007 with any other version of Access. I tried it. Microsoft really did a horible thing this time. On my machine (Win XP) and currently using Access XP (2002), it was taking about 7 minutes for Access 2007 to load the first time after using Access XP. Then it would load in the normal time, 5 to 10 seconds. But, when I would then load Access XP, that would take from 2 to 3 minutes to load. Back to 2007, another 7 or so minutes. Back to Access XP, another 2 to 3 minutes.
After quite a few phone calls and 4 to 6 hours on the phone with Microsoft, when they kept saying, "This is by design" I finally got someone to agree with me that this was beyond ludicrous. Supposedly, Microsoft is working to "fix" this where 2007 makes so many changes that other versions can not work without undoing those changes first.
Solution: Install Virtual PC 2007 and then use the virtual machine to run 2007.
Access 2007 is the first version that I know of that really does not play well with his older brothers.
What kind of problems? I've been mixing the versions since 1.1 and 2.0 on the same machine. So far, as I said before, 2007 is the first one I've had problems with. BTW, I've never loaded 2003 so 2003 is the only version I've never had on my machine. At one time I even had three versions, which I believe were 95, 97, and 2000 on one machine at one time, and using all three versions because I had clients using that many different versions.
Coo. The two main things were (as I recall - I ended up just sticking with single versions in the end):
The last version to load up was used the next time you opened an Access file rather than the one you wanted. You could piddle about with bat files and stuff as I remember but I was not organised enough for that.
The same extended opening time when an access app was opened by a different version of Access to the previous time as you are finding with 2007, though nothing like as prolonged. On the plus side it appeared to run a full \decompile everytime it did this
Nothing that rendered Access unusable but niggling & annoying.
Ops, I forgot about the opening of the database by clicking on the database. All my DBs have a shortcut, because I found in at least one version, that if everyone was sharing the same network version of the front end, then to share that database, the database needed to be opened with the MSAccess.exe and path refered to in the shortcut. That is, just double-clicking on the database kept others from being able to share.
I guess I'm even lazier, I would add a shortcut for each version of Access to my MS Office Shortcut Bar, thereby allowing me to open the version of Access I needed, then the client's database was generally available within the File menu's list of recently opened databases. Sortof a shortcut to a shortcut. (Sorry, but I had to)
Ah yeah - I suppose my habit of browsing to the files doesn't really mix well with 2+ versions. If you are in the habit of of opening dbs from the application then I guess that would mitigate the problem.
Funny to see our experiences were actually the same after it seemed they were poles apart at first