Question Microsoft Access 2000 - how to buy this version?

[lpapad]

A friend wants to buy Microsoft Access 2000.

Does anybody know whether is it possible to buy this version?

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

A friend wants to buy Microsoft Access 2000.

Does anybody know whether is it possible to buy this version?

Second Hand may be? Try eBay!

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[lpapad]

Thanks for the advise. Have a nice weekend.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

It will have to be second-hand. Retailers who sell Windows systems and who can sell upgrades to things like Windows Professional are under an agreement to NOT sell older versions once their current inventory of said products has been sold out.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Now I did a quick search and I found this Microsoft Access 2000 upgrade!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/MICROSOF...463613&hash=item360737057b:g:RBYAAOxyUgtTM-tw

Why I mention it? I recall having an upgrade disc for one of the Microsoft Access versions, I cannot remember which one! So it might not be this version!!! But the interesting thing was, I put the upgrade disc in the CD drive and it wouldn't do the upgrade because I didn't have Microsoft Access installed on my PC. Now, Here is the reason I mention it, it asked for the location of Microsoft Access... Out of frustration, devilment, whatever it might be, I pointed it to the D drive which is the drive that CD ROMs wasa in... It looked at itself, it said, "oh yes you've got a valid version of Microsoft Access" and it allowed the installation! But I don't know if it was the Access 2000 upgrade or if it was a 1997 upgrade, I can't remember which one... Somebody else might recall this little quirk more accurately than I!

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Another:-

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Microsof...942116?hash=item3b12784424:g:vBwAAOSwq8FbMmHE

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Search term to use Try:-

Microsoft Access 2000 sealed professional

 

[Pat Hartman]

I'm sure this is a stupid question but why would someone want to buy an 18 year old version of Access when newer versions will run a database of this version?

 

[lpapad]

Thank you all for your replies.

 

[Mike375]

I'm sure this is a stupid question but why would someone want to buy an 18 year old version of Access when newer versions will run a database of this version?

So true.

I can't speak personally on 2000 but I have very complex stuff on 2003 and runs with perfection on 2016.

What is also interesting is macros which for different reason I use a lot. In the later versions of Access they are more difficult to make and are missing many actions.

However, I can make them in 2003 send them to 2016 and even with actions not available in 2016 they not only run perfectly but also show the action type heading that is not available in 2016.

Perhaps if I searched around I might find the actions are in 2016 but hidden or whatever. Same as Control Panel is not listed in 2016 but you can get to it and put it on the taskbar.

Even if the desire for2000 is because of binding issues with Access to Word/Excel that is easily fixed with Office 365. In Australia it is only $13 per month and will run on 5 computers so then just run the 2000 stuff there. With Office 365 they don't charge for a change in version. I started with 2013 and then later it went to 2016 but not charge.

Seems to me that MS want as many people as possible on the same versions of Windows and same version of MS Office.

These days I won't make anything for anyone or small business unless they get Office 365 even if they have disks for 2003 etc.

 

[Cronk]

macros which for different reason I use a lot

I'm curious about the reasons why you would want to use a macro at all.



The only time I use a macro is to initiate the running of a procedure eg Autoexec. In latter years I have used macros where many controls have an event that triggers the same code where it's easier to multi-select the controls, and put the macro in the event action.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I'm curious about the reasons why you would want to use a macro at all.

Like many other Access features, Macros have their place during early stages of database development. Eventually, though, you want to change the macros to code and then run them using VBA calls. AND improve their error handling. I used them most often when I had a long sequence of successive action queries to massage things in a specific order.

I think of Macros as "scaffolding" that you put up to keep something from falling apart until you can put up the "real thing" (whatever that would be). That is similar to the way I think about code built by wizards. Great to get you off the ground but eventually you want to clean it up. A LOT.

 

[Mike375]

I'm curious about the reasons why you would want to use a macro at all.



The only time I use a macro is to initiate the running of a procedure eg Autoexec. In latter years I have used macros where many controls have an event that triggers the same code where it's easier to multi-select the controls, and put the macro in the event action.

A couple of reason with one being I just like them if you can do the job with them.

But a big one is changing something for someone and sending it by email. If I get them to open a form in design view then making changes to VBA will mean we both have a stroke But I can email a tiny Access file that is set to export the macro to their Access file. Of course I could do the same with a module but sometimes a small change will be needed and I can do this over the phone much easier than with a macro than a Module. However, not so much these days as macros have lost a particular aspect that can mean making certain changes harder.

 

[Mike375]

Like many other Access features, Macros have their place during early stages of database development. Eventually, though, you want to change the macros to code and then run them using VBA calls. AND improve their error handling. I used them most often when I had a long sequence of successive action queries to massage things in a specific order.

I think of Macros as "scaffolding" that you put up to keep something from falling apart until you can put up the "real thing" (whatever that would be). That is similar to the way I think about code built by wizards. Great to get you off the ground but eventually you want to clean it up. A LOT.

I also fit that description but I think if I didn't have 2003 my macro making would be greatly reduced.

Personally, I don't think there is a best specific way of making an Access file. For example, in my own case I am very driven by how easy it will be to make changes.

 

[gemma-the-husky]

fwiw, I would be inclined to use A2003 rather than A2000.

I develop in A2003, and the mde's run fine in all versions of access. When they get rid of the ribbon, I will use a later version.

I use an autoxec macro, and occasionally autokeys macros, but no others.