Running Access without Access installed

[Lightwave]

I 've been on this forum for a while now and its been very useful.

Anytime I've seen people ask whether a database can be run on a machine without access the answer has always been NO. Fair enough but just searching through the tinternet today and found this link.

http://computerprogramming.suite101.com/article.cfm/using_microsoft_access_without_microsoft_access

Anybody seen this solution before?
Anyone that knows more than me think this is legit??

Just interested no deadlines or anything.

 

[Lightwave]

OK read it a bit closer - and it doesn't say anything about access to the front end.

So while it does indicate access to tables and queries says nothing about the front end which I am thinking is 3/4 of a database often!!

So technically yes you have contact to the engine but not to the prettification..???

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

 

[ajetrumpet]

why do this? i guess it's a good thing, but even if it is legit, people that do not have access on their machines should run the runtime version, no?

 

[Lightwave]

Ah yes AJ when runtime is free seems little point in this?!??

Useful for reference I guess

 

[Boro]

It is maby true, maby not. But if it is true i don't see the aim of this. The
aim of higher software in hierarchy of the software is to ease development, to ease developers not to start from zero. I don't know, but if you should use assembler, maby you don't need even operating system.

 

[speakers_86]

You mean Access isn't free? :O

If you really can't get Access (legally of course!) then look into open office. I believe that suite comes with a db program similar to Access.

 

[Boro]

@speakers86 i tried db from open office 2 and for my perception it is practically
unusable for serious usage.

 

[mcclunyboy]

if you have access 2007 then they offer a free front end I think...

 

[Mike375]

I use Runtime 2007 to run dbs made in A2003. Works fine. Some small things don't work but overall I have not had to much to get things working OK

 

[gemma-the-husky]

its not quite about the runtime

a set of access tables can be read by numerous applications - such as Access, VB, C, Delphi etc.

SO if you decide to use a programming language, then you have to write code for any functionality you want that is not provided by the language itself. This may be fine - it depends on what you want to do.

Now, if you use Access directly, then you get many useful tools that probably mean you dont need to write code to achieve these things, and overall you may well achieve a better result in less time.

If you use the access runtime version, you get a halfway house - that gives some, but by no means all of the access functionality.

IMO, the full version is well worth the relatively modest additional cost outlay

 

[boblarson]

If you use the access runtime version, you get a halfway house - that gives some, but by no means all of the access functionality.

IMO, the full version is well worth the relatively modest additional cost outlay

If you have users that are not going to be developing in Access, why spend the extra? It doesn't make sense to me from a business standpoint (PLUS you have then the opportunity for rogue development which is what gets Access in trouble with a lot of IT departments). If there is a need for a full version of Access then get it, otherwise develop for the Runtime (all that is disabled is the development side of things and you have to ensure you handle errors appropriately and you need your own toolbars/ribbons, but other than that, it works just fine).