Different Versions of Object Libraries

I have Access 2000 and 2003 on my development machine. My client only has
Access 2000. When I develop for this client, I run Access 2000. However, my
code requires that I have the Microsoft Word Object Library and Microsoft
Outlook Object Library listed in References.

As I result, on my machine they're listed as version 11.0, and then, when I
upload the file, they show as missing. So I have to go through the steps of
removing the references and then re-adding them on the client's machine for
version 9.0. Obviously this is a bit of a pain I'd prefer to avoid.

I realize I could use late binding. But the code's already written, and I'd
prefer not to have rewrite everything -- at least not at this point.

Any ideas for how I can make this work without having to continually remove
and re-add the libraries?

Thanks.

Since your app must work with the older libraries, why not just set a
reference to those libraries instead of v11.0 fo that project?

Steve

"Phil Reynolds" wrote:

> I have Access 2000 and 2003 on my development machine. My client only has
> Access 2000. When I develop for this client, I run Access 2000. However, my
> code requires that I have the Microsoft Word Object Library and Microsoft
> Outlook Object Library listed in References.
>
> As I result, on my machine they're listed as version 11.0, and then, when I
> upload the file, they show as missing. So I have to go through the steps of
> removing the references and then re-adding them on the client's machine for
> version 9.0. Obviously this is a bit of a pain I'd prefer to avoid.
>
> I realize I could use late binding. But the code's already written, and I'd
> prefer not to have rewrite everything -- at least not at this point.
>
> Any ideas for how I can make this work without having to continually remove
> and re-add the libraries?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>

The only realistic solution here is to re-write your code for late biding.

Even a update to word or placing you software on a machine where they had a
custom install of office can break you code.

There is not really much here I can add.

You kind of being like a mechanic who asking how to avoid changing oil in
the car.

There is just not a reasonable answer here.

Either you have 100% control over how office is installed on the target
machine. Remember, even machine with the SAME version office can break if
pathnames are changed.

You have to bite the bullet. The result is code that will not break if word
is missing, upgraded, or is a different version.

It really not that hard to change to late binding. I always develop using
early binding to get the code working, and also have inti-sense during
development. Once the code is working, then you flip it over to late
binding.

--
Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
pleaseNOOSpamKallal@msn.com

If you do not use late binding, then you have to set reference to older
version of Word/Outlook object library on your developing machine (that is,
you have older Word/Outlook installed).

So, either use late binding; or (when using early binding) develop against
oldest version of automation server apps, if your app has to automate
multiple version of auotmation server apps, and hope the new version is
compatible to older version (MS Office apps are good on backward
compatibility).

"Phil Reynolds" <philr2354@msn.com> wrote in message
news:OFXJi.661$hI7.125@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net. ..
>I have Access 2000 and 2003 on my development machine. My client only has
>Access 2000. When I develop for this client, I run Access 2000. However, my
>code requires that I have the Microsoft Word Object Library and Microsoft
>Outlook Object Library listed in References.
>
> As I result, on my machine they're listed as version 11.0, and then, when
> I upload the file, they show as missing. So I have to go through the steps
> of removing the references and then re-adding them on the client's machine
> for version 9.0. Obviously this is a bit of a pain I'd prefer to avoid.
>
> I realize I could use late binding. But the code's already written, and
> I'd prefer not to have rewrite everything -- at least not at this point.
>
> Any ideas for how I can make this work without having to continually
> remove and re-add the libraries?
>
> Thanks.
>

On Sep 25, 9:54 am, "Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkal...@msn.com>
wrote:

> You have to bite the bullet. The result is code that will not break if word
> is missing, upgraded, or is a different version.

I have a healthy respect for Albert's depth of knowledge and length of
experience. And all that he says applies but not all of the time.

So the safe way to develop to cover all scenarios is to do what he
says.

HOWEVER

If you are not trying to be all things to all people and only have a
specific case and a specific problem and you don't like making
adjustments to how you are doing things, run two machines, virtual
(VirtualPC or VMWare) or physical, separate your Office versions and
test what you can before delivering.

In this day and age, the cost of acquiring a second physical machine
and software is VERY LOW compared to when we started in 1990 or 1985.
The cost of running a virtual machine is even lower as long as you
have enough RAM and hard disk space.

OK, thanks. That's good to know.

"Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkallal@msn.com> wrote in message
news:ODHh1Yw$HHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> The only realistic solution here is to re-write your code for late biding.
>
> Even a update to word or placing you software on a machine where they had
> a custom install of office can break you code.
>
> There is not really much here I can add.
>
> You kind of being like a mechanic who asking how to avoid changing oil in
> the car.
>
> There is just not a reasonable answer here.
>
> Either you have 100% control over how office is installed on the target
> machine. Remember, even machine with the SAME version office can break if
> pathnames are changed.
>
> You have to bite the bullet. The result is code that will not break if
> word is missing, upgraded, or is a different version.
>
> It really not that hard to change to late binding. I always develop using
> early binding to get the code working, and also have inti-sense during
> development. Once the code is working, then you flip it over to late
> binding.
>
> --
> Albert D. Kallal (Access MVP)
> Edmonton, Alberta Canada
> pleaseNOOSpamKallal@msn.com
>
>

Thanks.

"AnandaSim" <AnandaSim@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190683032.277980.212240@19g2000hsx.googlegro ups.com...
> On Sep 25, 9:54 am, "Albert D. Kallal" <PleaseNOOOsPAMmkal...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You have to bite the bullet. The result is code that will not break if
>> word
>> is missing, upgraded, or is a different version.
>
> I have a healthy respect for Albert's depth of knowledge and length of
> experience. And all that he says applies but not all of the time.
>
> So the safe way to develop to cover all scenarios is to do what he
> says.
>
> HOWEVER
>
> If you are not trying to be all things to all people and only have a
> specific case and a specific problem and you don't like making
> adjustments to how you are doing things, run two machines, virtual
> (VirtualPC or VMWare) or physical, separate your Office versions and
> test what you can before delivering.
>
> In this day and age, the cost of acquiring a second physical machine
> and software is VERY LOW compared to when we started in 1990 or 1985.
> The cost of running a virtual machine is even lower as long as you
> have enough RAM and hard disk space.
>

That would be fine. Only thing is, when I go to set the reference, I only
have the option to set it to Word/Office 11.0 (even though I'm running
Access 2000 (9.0) at the time I'm setting the reference). So, are you saying
I should set the reference on my client's machine (to 9.0) and then copy the
file back. Or are you saying that there's a way to set the reference to the
earlier version on my machine, because I'm not seeing how. Thanks!


"Norman Yuan" <NoAddress@NoEmail.fake> wrote in message
news:eUBHzaw$HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> If you do not use late binding, then you have to set reference to older
> version of Word/Outlook object library on your developing machine (that
> is, you have older Word/Outlook installed).
>
> So, either use late binding; or (when using early binding) develop against
> oldest version of automation server apps, if your app has to automate
> multiple version of auotmation server apps, and hope the new version is
> compatible to older version (MS Office apps are good on backward
> compatibility).
>
> "Phil Reynolds" <philr2354@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:OFXJi.661$hI7.125@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net. ..
>>I have Access 2000 and 2003 on my development machine. My client only has
>>Access 2000. When I develop for this client, I run Access 2000. However,
>>my code requires that I have the Microsoft Word Object Library and
>>Microsoft Outlook Object Library listed in References.
>>
>> As I result, on my machine they're listed as version 11.0, and then, when
>> I upload the file, they show as missing. So I have to go through the
>> steps of removing the references and then re-adding them on the client's
>> machine for version 9.0. Obviously this is a bit of a pain I'd prefer to
>> avoid.
>>
>> I realize I could use late binding. But the code's already written, and
>> I'd prefer not to have rewrite everything -- at least not at this point.
>>
>> Any ideas for how I can make this work without having to continually
>> remove and re-add the libraries?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>

If you don't have the other versions on your machine you are probably stuck
with late binding.

Steve

"Phil Reynolds" wrote:

> That would be fine. Only thing is, when I go to set the reference, I only
> have the option to set it to Word/Office 11.0 (even though I'm running
> Access 2000 (9.0) at the time I'm setting the reference). So, are you saying
> I should set the reference on my client's machine (to 9.0) and then copy the
> file back. Or are you saying that there's a way to set the reference to the
> earlier version on my machine, because I'm not seeing how. Thanks!
>
>
> "Norman Yuan" <NoAddress@NoEmail.fake> wrote in message
> news:eUBHzaw$HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> > If you do not use late binding, then you have to set reference to older
> > version of Word/Outlook object library on your developing machine (that
> > is, you have older Word/Outlook installed).
> >
> > So, either use late binding; or (when using early binding) develop against
> > oldest version of automation server apps, if your app has to automate
> > multiple version of auotmation server apps, and hope the new version is
> > compatible to older version (MS Office apps are good on backward
> > compatibility).
> >
> > "Phil Reynolds" <philr2354@msn.com> wrote in message
> > news:OFXJi.661$hI7.125@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net. ..
> >>I have Access 2000 and 2003 on my development machine. My client only has
> >>Access 2000. When I develop for this client, I run Access 2000. However,
> >>my code requires that I have the Microsoft Word Object Library and
> >>Microsoft Outlook Object Library listed in References.
> >>
> >> As I result, on my machine they're listed as version 11.0, and then, when
> >> I upload the file, they show as missing. So I have to go through the
> >> steps of removing the references and then re-adding them on the client's
> >> machine for version 9.0. Obviously this is a bit of a pain I'd prefer to
> >> avoid.
> >>
> >> I realize I could use late binding. But the code's already written, and
> >> I'd prefer not to have rewrite everything -- at least not at this point.
> >>
> >> Any ideas for how I can make this work without having to continually
> >> remove and re-add the libraries?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >
>
>
>

"Phil Reynolds" <philr2354@msn.com> wrote:

>I realize I could use late binding. But the code's already written, and I'd
>prefer not to have rewrite everything -- at least not at this point.

FWIW Late Binding should only take ten minutes or half hour per
instance of using the Word or Outlook libraries to implement. And
it's quite stable. I have many clients running an app with late
binding to Outlook and I know they don't have Outlook installed.

Tony
--
Tony Toews, Microsoft Access MVP
Please respond only in the newsgroups so that others can
read the entire thread of messages.
Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at
http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm
Tony's Microsoft Access Blog - http://msmvps.com/blogs/access/