Access Project in MS access 2007

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jose Carlos
  • Start date Start date
J

Jose Carlos

Today i navigate over Ms Access 2007 and i didn't see how can i create
projects in Ms access 2007.

In MS access 2007 I could create Adp but with the format 2003 and not with
the format 2007.

Somebody else knows any site where explain the procedures?

Thanks
JCP
 
Open MS Access2007, Hit "F1" key, enter "Access Project" and click "Search"
button.

Forgive me for not copying Access help topic "Create an Access project" step
by step here.
 
You cannot create an ADP file with the new Access 2007 format, only with the
older format and by using the .ADP suffixe (or file name extension) when
creating a new blank database.
 
This is what I understood, it is really a bad new.
The link from access to SQL Server over OLEdb is finished in ms access 2003?

We can link over ODBC but is not a native link.

If we work with ms access 2007, odebc is the best link to sql server?

Thanks
 
ADP are not officially finished but I wouldn't put a bet on it for any very
long term project.

As to Access 2007, ADP will still work but your best choice might be to use
ODBC if you want to use the latest features of A2007 or forget about Access
and switch to .NET. (There are also been many reports of performance
problems related to ADP 2007 posted in this and other newsgroups.).

If you want a religious discussion about ODBC versus ADP, take a look at the
thread "adp vs mdb" starting on 2007-05-15.
 
I just read adp vs odbc.
I prefer adp but with these news about access 2007 probably I will change my
ideia

I would like to swich to .net but I never work with it, I don't nkow how to
start.
About ADP and MDB i'm very familiar and I can develop software as my
costumer ask me about .net I don't know.
I saw the features about ms access 2007 and I liked a lot but i was
frustrated because adp doesn't work with all features.
 
Hi Sylvan

Do you know if the Visual Studio Team system Database professional is a good
program to developer front end to work to SQL Server?

Thanks
JCP
 
Probably that you don't need the Database part of the VST-Database Pro
because it's mainly tools for helping you in designing and deploying a
backend database but nothing you can do without it. The VST-Database Pro is
mainly for people working in a team environment for a big corporation.

If you want to develop a .NET application, the Standard and the Professional
versions of Visual Studio - the ones without the MSDN subscription - should
be more than sufficient to develop any good .NET application against a
SQL-Server and will cost you a lot less than any version of Visual Studio
Team. There are also the Express versions than can help you in starting
with .NET without coughing out money.

The Visual Studio Pro can also be bought with either a MSDN Premium or
Professional Subscription. The price is much higher but it might be worth
it for you.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa700921.aspx
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa718657.aspx

Prices at: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/aa700832.aspx
 
The last week I did a subcription visual studio team suite w/ msnd premium.
It is really expensive...
But only this week I had time to install visual studio and office 2007 and
then I saw the features about access and I was said about adp in this
version.

Do you know some sites to start visual studio, .net where i can find samples
about databases and documentation to start aplications?
My knowledge is bassically, access, vba, sql server 2000. With the last news
I must go .net.

Thanks
JCP
 
ADP is no longer supported/developped by MS so you have lost nothing if this
is only this week that you have heard about it but this doesn't mean that
you must totally forget it or forget about ODBC linked tables inside a MDB
or ACCDB file instead. The choice about choosing a particular technologies
for a particular project should be based on a variety of factors, including
the particularities of the project, of the client, of the current situation
on the client location and your own knowledge and experience. Most of these
factors are only known to you.

If you want to go with .NET (either or not at one hundred percent); you
should post to the forums dedicated to this topic.
 
thanks sylvain
Sylvain Lafontaine said:
ADP is no longer supported/developped by MS so you have lost nothing if
this is only this week that you have heard about it but this doesn't mean
that you must totally forget it or forget about ODBC linked tables inside
a MDB or ACCDB file instead. The choice about choosing a particular
technologies for a particular project should be based on a variety of
factors, including the particularities of the project, of the client, of
the current situation on the client location and your own knowledge and
experience. Most of these factors are only known to you.

If you want to go with .NET (either or not at one hundred percent); you
should post to the forums dedicated to this topic.
Click to expand...
 
I prefer adp also

I know that MS is committed to the ADP platform, I'm sleeping wiht Steve
Ballmer and he told me in his sleep
 
Sylvain

ADP is supported / developed by MSFT because it just had some major new
features in Access 2007.

When was the last time that MDB got a new feature?
 
Oh, my question wasn't directed to you (the original poster of this thread)
but to the person hidding himself behind the pseudonym of Tom Wimpernark.
In itself, using an alias or a pseudonym is not forbidden but this person is
a well know troll, changes frequently of pseudonym but much worse, use the
name or the common pseudonym of someone else to impersonate him.
 
who said that ADP is no longer supported / developed?

I had someone on the SQL Server team _GUARANTEE_ that ADP would work for the
next decade
 
I'll use my real name when and where I want

all I know is that Tom Wickerath is the biggest pussy ever invented
 
I'm not a troll; I just have the balls to stick up for ADP

Microsoft has never announced that ADP won't live in the next version.

You guys jump to conclusions based on your interpretations; and your
interpretations are incorrect
 
Back
Top