MS Access upgrade from 2010 - 2016 (1 Viewer)

Pavilion

New member
Local time
Today, 09:28
Joined
Jun 4, 2020
Messages
6
Hello All:

I am in the process of helping a major organization upgrade from 2010 to 2016 Access.

This post is merely a query. This organization inventoried over 14000 access files (some of the still .mdb - even though they've used 2010 for 8+ years). So, we are working to document possible problems that may arise before we start the actual upgrade process. We have already documented issues that may arise in an .mdb to .accdb conversion and are now working on documenting issues that may come up in a 2010 to 2016 conversion. To that end, what types of conversion issues have any of you run into with a 2010 to 2016 conversion? Specifically:

1. Have any of you run into issues with references no longer working? If so, which types of references?

2. Have any of you run into issues with ActiveX controls no longer working? If so, which types of ActiveX controls.

I've had my own experiences with upgrade conversion issues, but do not want to limit my advice to them based on just my experience. Your input will be very helpful.

Thank you in Advance
 

theDBguy

I’m here to help
Staff member
Local time
Today, 07:28
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
21,456
Hi. Welcome to AWF!

Are any of those .MDBs created by Access 97? If so, you may not be able to open them using 2016. And to upgrade them to .ACCDBs, you may have to convert them to Access 2003 .MDBs first. Just a thought...
 

isladogs

MVP / VIP
Local time
Today, 15:28
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
18,209
1. Pivot tables were deprecated after A2010
2. Version specific references such as Outlook 14 should be updated automatically

Issues will occur if you used 32-bit A2010 and upgrade to 64-bit A2016. For example
1. All API code will need modifying
2. Certain ActiveX controls won't work e.g. Flexgrid, Treeview, Slider
3. The old pre A2010 Calendar control won't work
4. Some older references such as Windows Common Controls won't work
 

Pavilion

New member
Local time
Today, 09:28
Joined
Jun 4, 2020
Messages
6
RE: you may have to convert them to Access 2003 .MDBs first. Just a thought...

Agree completely. Owners of the .mdbs have already been informed that they'll need to convert to Access 2003 and are being given the capability to do so as we speak. :)

I don't know how many will follow instructions, but the organization IT decision makers have basically come to the conclusion that if the database owners aren't motivated enough to convert their .mdbs to 2003, then the .mdbs aren't all that important. :)
 

Pavilion

New member
Local time
Today, 09:28
Joined
Jun 4, 2020
Messages
6
1. Pivot tables were deprecated after A2010
2. Version specific references such as Outlook 14 should be updated automatically

Issues will occur if you used 32-bit A2010 and upgrade to 64-bit A2016. For example
1. All API code will need modifying
2. Certain ActiveX controls won't work e.g. Flexgrid, Treeview, Slider
3. The old pre A2010 Calendar control won't work
4. Some older references such as Windows Common Controls won't work
Thank you isladogs - this information is helpful. :)
 

Micron

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 10:28
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
3,478
I imagine that none of these old db's use replication, otherwise you couldn't (I think) open them in your 2010 version anyway. Certainly when you upgrade further, replicated db's cannot be opened so I thought I'd throw that out there just in case any of them are.
 

Pavilion

New member
Local time
Today, 09:28
Joined
Jun 4, 2020
Messages
6
I imagine that none of these old db's use replication, otherwise you couldn't (I think) open them in your 2010 version anyway. Certainly when you upgrade further, replicated db's cannot be opened so I thought I'd throw that out there just in case any of them are.
Yes - thank you. This is good information to have.

They've been operating in 2010 for quite a number of years. So, if it was an issue, theoretically it should have come up already. Those old .mdbs sitting out there are going to include some surprises, it's not out of the question that this might come up. :)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom