Access 97 to 2000 Conversion Error

[Michelle]

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

[Arthur Wood]

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

[Michelle]

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
>

[Paul Clement]

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)

[Arthur Wood]

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
>>
>

[Michelle]

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
>>>
>>
>

[Kevin MacCallum]

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
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Michelle]

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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Kevin MacCallum]

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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>