Office Developer and Office XP

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Don Kuykendall

    Office Developer and Office XP

    I have Office 2000 and Office Developer and I want to upgrade to
    Office XP. Will my copy of Office Developer work with Access XP?
  • Douglas J. Steele

    #2
    Re: Office Developer and Office XP

    Depends what you mean by work. As far as I'm concerned, the major purpose of
    Office Developer is the runtime that lets you package your application so
    that people who don't already have Access installed will be able to use it.
    That won't work: you need the Access 2002 runtime to work with Access 2002
    databases. However, some of the other stuff that's in Office Developer (the
    extra controls and stuff) should still work.

    --
    Doug Steele, Microsoft Access MVP



    "Don Kuykendall" <saynoto_s_p_a_ m@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:59600f3.03 10032241.3e01d9 14@posting.goog le.com...[color=blue]
    > I have Office 2000 and Office Developer and I want to upgrade to
    > Office XP. Will my copy of Office Developer work with Access XP?[/color]


    Comment

    • Larry  Linson

      #3
      Re: Office Developer and Office XP

      If you mean, can you create a database with Access 2002 and package it for
      distribution with Office 2000 Developer, the answer is yes if you save it as
      an Access 2000-format MDB. You can't generate an MDE-format file with Office
      2002 that will run with the Access 2000 runtime. But, you could take
      advantage of the perhaps smoother interface of Access 2002 (or 2003, see
      below) to create the DB, save as Access 2000, use Access 2000 to create the
      MDE and package with the Office 2000 Developer Edition.

      If you need any of the Access 2002-unique features, e.g., pivot tables, then
      the answer is "No" because those will be lost saving in Access 2000 format.
      But there are not a great many new features in Access 2002 itself... for
      example, the builtin Split function is new and nice, but there are many
      coded versions of Split for earlier versions that you can obtain for free.

      If I were considering getting a new version, I'd take a look at Office 2003.
      It's available now in release version to subscribers of Microsoft Developer
      Network Universal and will be in the stores before long, if not already. It,
      too, has relatively few Access-only enhancements over Access 2002, but the
      combination of few + few may be more enticing. I've used the Beta 2 of
      Access 2003 quite a bit and it seems good and solid, so far. I haven't tried
      the Office 2003 Developer Edition, though.

      Larry Linson
      Microsoft Access MVP

      "Don Kuykendall" <saynoto_s_p_a_ m@hotmail.com> wrote in message
      news:59600f3.03 10032241.3e01d9 14@posting.goog le.com...[color=blue]
      > I have Office 2000 and Office Developer and I want to upgrade to
      > Office XP. Will my copy of Office Developer work with Access XP?[/color]


      Comment

      • Steve

        #4
        Re: Office Developer and Office XP

        On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 19:14:43 GMT, "Larry Linson"
        <bouncer@localh ost.net> wrote:

        <snip>
        [color=blue]
        > I haven't tried
        >the Office 2003 Developer Edition, though.
        >[/color]
        Because, it does NOT exist.

        There is a Visual Studio Tools for the Microsoft Office System, which
        includes the Access 2003 runtime, and a lot of other stuff to allow
        .Net developers to interface with Office. Included is VB.Net

        As an aside, anyone who is developing in the MS world, should strongly
        consider learning OOP and .Net, for many reasons.

        Steven Zuch
        Cogent Management Inc.

        Comment

        • Larry  Linson

          #5
          Re: Office Developer and Office XP

          "Steve" wrote
          [color=blue]
          > As an aside, anyone who is developing
          > in the MS world, should strongly con-
          > sider learning OOP and .Net, for many
          > reasons.[/color]

          Seems to me we have had similar discussions before.

          Would you care to list some of those many reasons that apply to the Access
          developer who wants to point-and-click to a friendly user interface and
          sprinkle just enough code behind it to make it work and work smoothly? And,
          in this context, OOP, in my view, is creating classes and objects, not just
          being, as we all know we are "object oriented programmers, consumer side" --
          but except for the slightly different notation, we could, from the consumer
          side, just as well be "users of built-in functions".

          Not a big development team, not a company/team that is likely to be able to
          "reuse" application functionality, not an enterprise applications, and
          definitely not a code-intensive environment.

          It's my view that OOP is _primarily_ of benefit in a code-intensive
          environment and that, if I were in such an environment, I'd likely be using
          it because some (but not nearly all) of the many arguments used in support
          of OOP would have merit.




          Comment

          • Steve

            #6
            Re: Office Developer and Office XP

            On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 21:26:33 GMT, "Larry Linson"
            <bouncer@localh ost.net> wrote:
            [color=blue]
            >"Steve" wrote
            >[color=green]
            > > As an aside, anyone who is developing
            > > in the MS world, should strongly con-
            > > sider learning OOP and .Net, for many
            > > reasons.[/color]
            >
            >Seems to me we have had similar discussions before.
            >[/color]
            Maybe, but at my age I seem to forget previous discussions ... at
            least that is what my wife keeps saying :)
            [color=blue]
            >Would you care to list some of those many reasons that apply to the Access
            >developer who wants to point-and-click to a friendly user interface and
            >sprinkle just enough code behind it to make it work and work smoothly?[/color]

            To just be able to accomplish the above, there is no reason at all.
            [color=blue]
            >And,
            >in this context, OOP, in my view, is creating classes and objects, not just
            >being, as we all know we are "object oriented programmers, consumer side" --
            >but except for the slightly different notation, we could, from the consumer
            >side, just as well be "users of built-in functions".
            >[/color]

            Yes, we can consume objects without knowing anything about OOP.

            [color=blue]
            >Not a big development team, not a company/team that is likely to be able to
            >"reuse" application functionality, not an enterprise applications, and
            >definitely not a code-intensive environment.
            >
            >It's my view that OOP is _primarily_ of benefit in a code-intensive
            >environment and that, if I were in such an environment, I'd likely be using
            >it because some (but not nearly all) of the many arguments used in support
            >of OOP would have merit.[/color]

            Frankly, I agreed with all of the above, for many, many years. But I
            am finding several basic trends that make me want to learn OOP, and
            VB.Net

            (1) MS new programming platform is OOP. Their new development
            languages are OOP. They are packaging VB.Net with the Access
            Developer's Extension (run time). They are encouraging developers to
            use .Net languages to interface with Office.

            (2) Lot's of software developers talk OOP. Not only do I develop
            systems, but I interface with other developers of my clients, and on
            occasion sub contract work out to other developers using non-Access
            tools. I want to understand what they are doing, and why they are
            doing it.

            (3) Kids in school learning programming are learning OOP. This is
            what I see, and what I have been told by alumni of top, engineering
            schools. Again, I want to understand how they will tackle development
            projects.

            (4) OOP is not just syntax. It is another way to look at a system.
            To some extent, it is like going from the top/down structure
            programming in the DOS world, to the event driven/messaging system of
            the Windows world. It was not just a syntax change, but different
            ways of looking at programming.

            So, even though I do not need to know OOP to meet my current
            development needs, I feel that I need to learn it to better interact
            with other developers, align myself with current software trends, and
            understand another way to look at programming.

            As an aside, I have also tried to understand some of the differences
            between C# and VB.Net, and of course, the .Net foundation

            How much OOP code have I written to date .... none. But again, I am
            not reading about OOP to solve my immediate, current development
            tasks.

            Steven R. Zuch
            Cogent Management Inc.

            Comment

            Working...