Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Michelle Guest

    Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both Access
    97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted to 2000.
    The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in 97 I get
    an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help would
    be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks,
    Michelle

  2. #2
    Arthur Wood Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    Michelle,
    Since you say that you have a split database, Iassume that you mean by
    that that the code, formsetc are in one MDB, with LINKED tables to the Data
    part (a separate mdb)? Correct? If that is the case, then leave the DATA
    MDB as Access 97 (yes, you can LINK from an Access 2000 MDB to tables in
    an Access 97 MDB). I have a VERY significant application, running right
    now at the Pentagon (in Washington DC) that does EXACTLY that. Some users
    hve Access 2000 on their PC, and some still have Access 97. I am maintaining
    two copies of the front-end (one in Access 97, and one in Access 2000), with
    the DATA back-end still in Access 97. Both of the two front-end versions
    look and feel EXACTLY the same, and interact with the Access 97 DATA just
    fine. So, CONVERT the DATA MDB back to Access 97, then link BOTH front-end
    apps (Access 97 AND Access 2000 front-ends) to the single Access 97 Back-end
    and you should be fine.

    Arthur Wood


    "Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >
    >Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both Access
    >97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted to

    2000.
    > The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in 97 I

    get
    >an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help would
    >be greatly appreciated.
    >
    >Thanks,
    >Michelle



  3. #3
    Michelle Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    Arthur,
    Thank yor for your response. You are correct and that is what I did, but
    is there a way for the 2000 front-end to run on 97 so you only have one front-end
    application to maintain?

    Thanks again,
    Michelle


    "Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >
    >Michelle,
    > Since you say that you have a split database, Iassume that you mean by
    >that that the code, formsetc are in one MDB, with LINKED tables to the Data
    >part (a separate mdb)? Correct? If that is the case, then leave the DATA
    >MDB as Access 97 (yes, you can LINK from an Access 2000 MDB to tables in
    >an Access 97 MDB). I have a VERY significant application, running right
    >now at the Pentagon (in Washington DC) that does EXACTLY that. Some users
    >hve Access 2000 on their PC, and some still have Access 97. I am maintaining
    >two copies of the front-end (one in Access 97, and one in Access 2000),

    with
    >the DATA back-end still in Access 97. Both of the two front-end versions
    > look and feel EXACTLY the same, and interact with the Access 97 DATA just
    >fine. So, CONVERT the DATA MDB back to Access 97, then link BOTH front-end
    >apps (Access 97 AND Access 2000 front-ends) to the single Access 97 Back-end
    >and you should be fine.
    >
    >Arthur Wood
    >
    >
    >"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both Access
    >>97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted to

    >2000.
    >> The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in 97 I

    >get
    >>an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help would
    >>be greatly appreciated.
    >>
    >>Thanks,
    >>Michelle

    >



  4. #4
    Arthur Wood Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    No, that cannot be done.

    1) the VBA in 2000 is related to VB 6, while the VBA in 97 is related to
    VB 5.
    2) the internal formats are different, which is why you get the "Unrecognized
    database format error"

    The only thing that you can do is to support both flavors in the Front-end
    until you can get ALL of the users to migrate up to 2000. Sorry, but that
    is the way life is.

    Arthur


    "Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >
    >Arthur,
    >Thank yor for your response. You are correct and that is what I did, but
    >is there a way for the 2000 front-end to run on 97 so you only have one

    front-end
    >application to maintain?
    >
    >Thanks again,
    >Michelle
    >
    >
    >"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>Michelle,
    >> Since you say that you have a split database, Iassume that you mean

    by
    >>that that the code, formsetc are in one MDB, with LINKED tables to the

    Data
    >>part (a separate mdb)? Correct? If that is the case, then leave the DATA
    >>MDB as Access 97 (yes, you can LINK from an Access 2000 MDB to tables in
    >>an Access 97 MDB). I have a VERY significant application, running right
    >>now at the Pentagon (in Washington DC) that does EXACTLY that. Some users
    >>hve Access 2000 on their PC, and some still have Access 97. I am maintaining
    >>two copies of the front-end (one in Access 97, and one in Access 2000),

    >with
    >>the DATA back-end still in Access 97. Both of the two front-end versions
    >> look and feel EXACTLY the same, and interact with the Access 97 DATA just
    >>fine. So, CONVERT the DATA MDB back to Access 97, then link BOTH front-end
    >>apps (Access 97 AND Access 2000 front-ends) to the single Access 97 Back-end
    >>and you should be fine.
    >>
    >>Arthur Wood
    >>
    >>
    >>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both Access
    >>>97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted to

    >>2000.
    >>> The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in 97

    I
    >>get
    >>>an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help would
    >>>be greatly appreciated.
    >>>
    >>>Thanks,
    >>>Michelle

    >>

    >



  5. #5
    Paul Clement Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error

    On 18 Apr 2002 18:27:10 -0800, "Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:


    Arthur,
    Thank yor for your response. You are correct and that is what I did, but
    is there a way for the 2000 front-end to run on 97 so you only have one front-end
    application to maintain?


    No, you pretty much need to maintain version consistency between the version of Access and the
    database. Once converted to a newer version of the application compatibility of the database with
    respect to an older version of the application is lost. New versions of the Access application
    generally need to modify an older version of a database in order to use newer features.


    Paul ~~~ pclement@ameritech.net
    Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

  6. #6
    Michelle Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    It's a bummer, but good to know. Thanks to all!


    "Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >
    >No, that cannot be done.
    >
    >1) the VBA in 2000 is related to VB 6, while the VBA in 97 is related to
    >VB 5.
    >2) the internal formats are different, which is why you get the "Unrecognized
    >database format error"
    >
    >The only thing that you can do is to support both flavors in the Front-end
    >until you can get ALL of the users to migrate up to 2000. Sorry, but that
    >is the way life is.
    >
    >Arthur
    >
    >
    >"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>Arthur,
    >>Thank yor for your response. You are correct and that is what I did, but
    >>is there a way for the 2000 front-end to run on 97 so you only have one

    >front-end
    >>application to maintain?
    >>
    >>Thanks again,
    >>Michelle
    >>
    >>
    >>"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>Michelle,
    >>> Since you say that you have a split database, Iassume that you mean

    >by
    >>>that that the code, formsetc are in one MDB, with LINKED tables to the

    >Data
    >>>part (a separate mdb)? Correct? If that is the case, then leave the

    DATA
    >>>MDB as Access 97 (yes, you can LINK from an Access 2000 MDB to tables

    in
    >>>an Access 97 MDB). I have a VERY significant application, running right
    >>>now at the Pentagon (in Washington DC) that does EXACTLY that. Some users
    >>>hve Access 2000 on their PC, and some still have Access 97. I am maintaining
    >>>two copies of the front-end (one in Access 97, and one in Access 2000),

    >>with
    >>>the DATA back-end still in Access 97. Both of the two front-end versions
    >>> look and feel EXACTLY the same, and interact with the Access 97 DATA

    just
    >>>fine. So, CONVERT the DATA MDB back to Access 97, then link BOTH front-end
    >>>apps (Access 97 AND Access 2000 front-ends) to the single Access 97 Back-end
    >>>and you should be fine.
    >>>
    >>>Arthur Wood
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both Access
    >>>>97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted

    to
    >>>2000.
    >>>> The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in 97

    >I
    >>>get
    >>>>an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help

    would
    >>>>be greatly appreciated.
    >>>>
    >>>>Thanks,
    >>>>Michelle
    >>>

    >>

    >



  7. #7
    Kevin MacCallum Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    Why do you have to have the front end piece in Access 2000?

    Why can't it all be in Access 97 format (database containing code & forms
    and other one containing data only). Access 2000 can open & run an Access
    97 database. I'm doing here with a secured (using Access security) database.
    Users of both Access 97 & 2000 are able to run the application.

    Other than not being able ot make any design changes via Access 2000,
    the only real gotcha is that the very first time Access 2000 trys to open
    the "front end" database (in Access 97 format) it has to open it exclusively
    - even if it is NOT going to convert it. When the opening screen appears
    with the question - do you want to Open or Convert - answer OPEN. It then
    writes some sort of entry into the database (I haven't explored exactly what
    it writes). Once this occurs then all other Access 97 / 2000 users are able
    to run the application concurrently.
    UNTIL this occurs Access 2000 users will be unable to open the database.

    Every time you make any design time changes to a form (and possibly other
    database objects - I haven't explored all possible scenarios) you will have
    to go through the exercise of first opening it under Access 2000 exclusively
    so Access can rewrite the "entry' in to the MDB file then is can opened by
    either version of Access.

    We are working in a mixed environment (Access 97 / 2000) so I do all Access
    development in Access 97. When I'm finished I open the database under Access
    2000 - let it do it's thing - close it out then copy the updated MDB file
    to our network share point for everyone to use.

    Much easier than trying to maintain 2 separate databases in each format.

    Kevin MacCallum

    "Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >
    >It's a bummer, but good to know. Thanks to all!
    >
    >
    >"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>No, that cannot be done.
    >>
    >>1) the VBA in 2000 is related to VB 6, while the VBA in 97 is related to
    >>VB 5.
    >>2) the internal formats are different, which is why you get the "Unrecognized
    >>database format error"
    >>
    >>The only thing that you can do is to support both flavors in the Front-end
    >>until you can get ALL of the users to migrate up to 2000. Sorry, but that
    >>is the way life is.
    >>
    >>Arthur
    >>
    >>
    >>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>Arthur,
    >>>Thank yor for your response. You are correct and that is what I did,

    but
    >>>is there a way for the 2000 front-end to run on 97 so you only have one

    >>front-end
    >>>application to maintain?
    >>>
    >>>Thanks again,
    >>>Michelle
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>Michelle,
    >>>> Since you say that you have a split database, Iassume that you mean

    >>by
    >>>>that that the code, formsetc are in one MDB, with LINKED tables to the

    >>Data
    >>>>part (a separate mdb)? Correct? If that is the case, then leave the

    >DATA
    >>>>MDB as Access 97 (yes, you can LINK from an Access 2000 MDB to tables

    >in
    >>>>an Access 97 MDB). I have a VERY significant application, running right
    >>>>now at the Pentagon (in Washington DC) that does EXACTLY that. Some

    users
    >>>>hve Access 2000 on their PC, and some still have Access 97. I am maintaining
    >>>>two copies of the front-end (one in Access 97, and one in Access 2000),
    >>>with
    >>>>the DATA back-end still in Access 97. Both of the two front-end versions
    >>>> look and feel EXACTLY the same, and interact with the Access 97 DATA

    >just
    >>>>fine. So, CONVERT the DATA MDB back to Access 97, then link BOTH front-end
    >>>>apps (Access 97 AND Access 2000 front-ends) to the single Access 97 Back-end
    >>>>and you should be fine.
    >>>>
    >>>>Arthur Wood
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both Access
    >>>>>97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted

    >to
    >>>>2000.
    >>>>> The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in 97

    >>I
    >>>>get
    >>>>>an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help

    >would
    >>>>>be greatly appreciated.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Thanks,
    >>>>>Michelle
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >



  8. #8
    Michelle Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    What you have explained sounds easy enough, however I can't be sure the next
    programmer will know to do that. Given the default is to convert the database
    and knowing users, that initial question was the one thing that we wanted
    to avoid. Also, once to corporate wide upgrade is complete, we can eliminate
    the 97 version all together without going back and converting each app.
    I am definitely open to feedback if this is not the best approach.

    Thanks,
    Michelle


    "Kevin MacCallum" <kdmaccal@gapac_stuff_.com> wrote:
    >
    >Why do you have to have the front end piece in Access 2000?
    >
    >Why can't it all be in Access 97 format (database containing code & forms
    >and other one containing data only). Access 2000 can open & run an Access
    >97 database. I'm doing here with a secured (using Access security) database.
    >Users of both Access 97 & 2000 are able to run the application.
    >
    >Other than not being able ot make any design changes via Access 2000,
    >the only real gotcha is that the very first time Access 2000 trys to open
    >the "front end" database (in Access 97 format) it has to open it exclusively
    >- even if it is NOT going to convert it. When the opening screen appears
    >with the question - do you want to Open or Convert - answer OPEN. It then
    >writes some sort of entry into the database (I haven't explored exactly

    what
    >it writes). Once this occurs then all other Access 97 / 2000 users are able
    >to run the application concurrently.
    >UNTIL this occurs Access 2000 users will be unable to open the database.
    >
    >Every time you make any design time changes to a form (and possibly other
    >database objects - I haven't explored all possible scenarios) you will have
    >to go through the exercise of first opening it under Access 2000 exclusively
    >so Access can rewrite the "entry' in to the MDB file then is can opened

    by
    >either version of Access.
    >
    >We are working in a mixed environment (Access 97 / 2000) so I do all Access
    >development in Access 97. When I'm finished I open the database under Access
    >2000 - let it do it's thing - close it out then copy the updated MDB file
    >to our network share point for everyone to use.
    >
    >Much easier than trying to maintain 2 separate databases in each format.
    >
    >Kevin MacCallum
    >
    >"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>It's a bummer, but good to know. Thanks to all!
    >>
    >>
    >>"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>No, that cannot be done.
    >>>
    >>>1) the VBA in 2000 is related to VB 6, while the VBA in 97 is related

    to
    >>>VB 5.
    >>>2) the internal formats are different, which is why you get the "Unrecognized
    >>>database format error"
    >>>
    >>>The only thing that you can do is to support both flavors in the Front-end
    >>>until you can get ALL of the users to migrate up to 2000. Sorry, but

    that
    >>>is the way life is.
    >>>
    >>>Arthur
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>Arthur,
    >>>>Thank yor for your response. You are correct and that is what I did,

    >but
    >>>>is there a way for the 2000 front-end to run on 97 so you only have one
    >>>front-end
    >>>>application to maintain?
    >>>>
    >>>>Thanks again,
    >>>>Michelle
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Michelle,
    >>>>> Since you say that you have a split database, Iassume that you mean
    >>>by
    >>>>>that that the code, formsetc are in one MDB, with LINKED tables to the
    >>>Data
    >>>>>part (a separate mdb)? Correct? If that is the case, then leave the

    >>DATA
    >>>>>MDB as Access 97 (yes, you can LINK from an Access 2000 MDB to tables

    >>in
    >>>>>an Access 97 MDB). I have a VERY significant application, running right
    >>>>>now at the Pentagon (in Washington DC) that does EXACTLY that. Some

    >users
    >>>>>hve Access 2000 on their PC, and some still have Access 97. I am maintaining
    >>>>>two copies of the front-end (one in Access 97, and one in Access 2000),
    >>>>with
    >>>>>the DATA back-end still in Access 97. Both of the two front-end versions
    >>>>> look and feel EXACTLY the same, and interact with the Access 97 DATA

    >>just
    >>>>>fine. So, CONVERT the DATA MDB back to Access 97, then link BOTH front-end
    >>>>>apps (Access 97 AND Access 2000 front-ends) to the single Access 97

    Back-end
    >>>>>and you should be fine.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Arthur Wood
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both

    Access
    >>>>>>97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted

    >>to
    >>>>>2000.
    >>>>>> The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in

    97
    >>>I
    >>>>>get
    >>>>>>an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help

    >>would
    >>>>>>be greatly appreciated.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Thanks,
    >>>>>>Michelle
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >



  9. #9
    Kevin MacCallum Guest

    Re: Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error


    Couple of things:
    1) I'm able to control when the "new or updated" Access 97 database is rolled
    out, so I can open it in Access 2000 myself first and answer the "Open /
    Convert" question correctly. I then just copy it out to the network share
    point. This way none of the users are ever faced with it. If you don't have
    this option then I can see where it could be an issue.

    2) Even if you answer Yes to convert it will NOT let you convert the database
    and overwrite the existing MDB file. You have to give it a different name.
    Of course once the second database is out there, depending on network file
    permissions, there is nothing stopping users from renaming the old and new
    files.

    Kevin

    "Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >
    >What you have explained sounds easy enough, however I can't be sure the

    next
    >programmer will know to do that. Given the default is to convert the database
    >and knowing users, that initial question was the one thing that we wanted
    >to avoid. Also, once to corporate wide upgrade is complete, we can eliminate
    >the 97 version all together without going back and converting each app.


    >I am definitely open to feedback if this is not the best approach.
    >
    >Thanks,
    >Michelle
    >
    >
    >"Kevin MacCallum" <kdmaccal@gapac_stuff_.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>Why do you have to have the front end piece in Access 2000?
    >>
    >>Why can't it all be in Access 97 format (database containing code & forms
    >>and other one containing data only). Access 2000 can open & run an Access
    >>97 database. I'm doing here with a secured (using Access security) database.
    >>Users of both Access 97 & 2000 are able to run the application.
    >>
    >>Other than not being able ot make any design changes via Access 2000,
    >>the only real gotcha is that the very first time Access 2000 trys to open
    >>the "front end" database (in Access 97 format) it has to open it exclusively
    >>- even if it is NOT going to convert it. When the opening screen appears
    >>with the question - do you want to Open or Convert - answer OPEN. It then
    >>writes some sort of entry into the database (I haven't explored exactly

    >what
    >>it writes). Once this occurs then all other Access 97 / 2000 users are

    able
    >>to run the application concurrently.
    >>UNTIL this occurs Access 2000 users will be unable to open the database.
    >>
    >>Every time you make any design time changes to a form (and possibly other
    >>database objects - I haven't explored all possible scenarios) you will

    have
    >>to go through the exercise of first opening it under Access 2000 exclusively
    >>so Access can rewrite the "entry' in to the MDB file then is can opened

    >by
    >>either version of Access.
    >>
    >>We are working in a mixed environment (Access 97 / 2000) so I do all Access
    >>development in Access 97. When I'm finished I open the database under Access
    >>2000 - let it do it's thing - close it out then copy the updated MDB file
    >>to our network share point for everyone to use.
    >>
    >>Much easier than trying to maintain 2 separate databases in each format.
    >>
    >>Kevin MacCallum
    >>
    >>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>It's a bummer, but good to know. Thanks to all!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>No, that cannot be done.
    >>>>
    >>>>1) the VBA in 2000 is related to VB 6, while the VBA in 97 is related

    >to
    >>>>VB 5.
    >>>>2) the internal formats are different, which is why you get the "Unrecognized
    >>>>database format error"
    >>>>
    >>>>The only thing that you can do is to support both flavors in the Front-end
    >>>>until you can get ALL of the users to migrate up to 2000. Sorry, but

    >that
    >>>>is the way life is.
    >>>>
    >>>>Arthur
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Arthur,
    >>>>>Thank yor for your response. You are correct and that is what I did,

    >>but
    >>>>>is there a way for the 2000 front-end to run on 97 so you only have

    one
    >>>>front-end
    >>>>>application to maintain?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Thanks again,
    >>>>>Michelle
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>"Arthur Wood" <wooda@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Michelle,
    >>>>>> Since you say that you have a split database, Iassume that you mean
    >>>>by
    >>>>>>that that the code, formsetc are in one MDB, with LINKED tables to

    the
    >>>>Data
    >>>>>>part (a separate mdb)? Correct? If that is the case, then leave the
    >>>DATA
    >>>>>>MDB as Access 97 (yes, you can LINK from an Access 2000 MDB to tables
    >>>in
    >>>>>>an Access 97 MDB). I have a VERY significant application, running

    right
    >>>>>>now at the Pentagon (in Washington DC) that does EXACTLY that. Some

    >>users
    >>>>>>hve Access 2000 on their PC, and some still have Access 97. I am maintaining
    >>>>>>two copies of the front-end (one in Access 97, and one in Access 2000),
    >>>>>with
    >>>>>>the DATA back-end still in Access 97. Both of the two front-end versions
    >>>>>> look and feel EXACTLY the same, and interact with the Access 97 DATA
    >>>just
    >>>>>>fine. So, CONVERT the DATA MDB back to Access 97, then link BOTH front-end
    >>>>>>apps (Access 97 AND Access 2000 front-ends) to the single Access 97

    >Back-end
    >>>>>>and you should be fine.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Arthur Wood
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>"Michelle" <reiff2@cs.com> wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Hi. I have an Access 97 DAO application that needs to run on both

    >Access
    >>>>>>>97 and 2000. The database was split and the front-end was converted
    >>>to
    >>>>>>2000.
    >>>>>>> The application works fine on 2000, but when I try and open it in

    >97
    >>>>I
    >>>>>>get
    >>>>>>>an unrecognizable database format error. I'm at a loss and any help
    >>>would
    >>>>>>>be greatly appreciated.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Thanks,
    >>>>>>>Michelle
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center