Is MS Office required for Access

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Laurel - 11 Apr 2005 02:51 GMT

In another thread I asked about why my Access application finds a file
missing (MSADO26.tlb) on a Windows 2000 system. I have just found out that
that PC doesn't have Office installed. Might that be the problem? Might
msado26.tlb come with Office?

If so, why wouldn't the Access installation notice that Office was missing?

Reply to this Message

John Vinson - 11 Apr 2005 03:07 GMT

>In another thread I asked about why my Access application finds a file
>missing (MSADO26.tlb) on a Windows 2000 system. I have just found out that
>that PC doesn't have Office installed. Might that be the problem? Might
>msado26.tlb come with Office?
>
>If so, why wouldn't the Access installation notice that Office was missing?

Access is *PART* of Office. Office isn't a program; it's a suite of
programs, including Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.

You can't install Office qua Office; if you install any of the
programs in the Office suite (including Access), the necessary
programs and .dll and .tlb files should get installed.

To answer your question in another thread - yes, you can and should
install the most recent MDAC on your Windows2000 computer. The version
number on MDAC and the version number on Win2000 are totally
unrelated.

John W. Vinson[MVP]

Reply to this Message

Laurel - 13 Apr 2005 10:10 GMT

> Access is *PART* of Office. Office isn't a program; it's a suite of
> programs, including Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.

OK, what I meant to say is that "Office 97" wasn't installed. And Access
doesn't come with every kind of "Office" suite installation (e.g., "Office
97")> In other words, you sort of can install "Office." And it doesn't
necessarily give you Access.... probably a difference between Pro and not
Pro or something... I forget. Anyway, please see question below.

> You can't install Office qua Office; if you install any of the
> programs in the Office suite (including Access), the necessary
> programs and .dll and .tlb files should get installed.

Then do I understand correctly that there's a consensus in this thread that
what I'm experiencing is a fluke? That Access installed without any other
Office programs normally should bring everything with it? An that it's not
worth thinking about why this happened on this PC. This will probably never
happen to me again?

TIA
LAS

> To answer your question in another thread - yes, you can and should
> install the most recent MDAC on your Windows2000 computer. The version
> number on MDAC and the version number on Win2000 are totally
> unrelated.
>
> John W. Vinson[MVP]

Reply to this Message

Brendan Reynolds - 13 Apr 2005 10:49 GMT

Access installed on it's own will install a version of ADO. But that does
not guarantee that it will be the same version that you have referenced on
your development PC. Unfortunately, you do need to think about this version
compatibility issue, because it certainly will happen again.

The key point to understand here is that ADO is not part of Access, it is a
component that is shared by many programs, so many different programs may
have installed different versions of ADO on your PC and/or on the target PC.

Possible solutions include the following (not necessarily an exhaustive
list) ...

1) Identifying a 'least common denominator' - a version that is already
present on all target PCs and on your development PC, and using that
version. This approach is only practical in very limited circumstances.

2) Installing the latest version both on your development PC and on the
target PCs. The officially recommended approach.

3) Avoiding ADO and sticking with DAO. My personal recommendation.
Versioning problems are not unknown with DAO, but they are much less common
than with ADO, because there just aren't as many versions of DAO out there.

Signature

Brendan Reynolds (MVP)

>> Access is *PART* of Office. Office isn't a program; it's a suite of
>> programs, including Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>>
>> John W. Vinson[MVP]

Reply to this Message

Laurel - 13 Apr 2005 17:22 GMT

Thanks so much. This is the sort of context thing I've been looking for.

Am I correct that "ADO" precedes "DAO"? That DAO is the one that supports
non Jet databases, etc? I sort of had an idea that the were in alphabetical
order so to speak.

> Access installed on it's own will install a version of ADO. But that does
> not guarantee that it will be the same version that you have referenced on
[quoted text clipped - 49 lines]
>>>
>>> John W. Vinson[MVP]

Reply to this Message

Rick Brandt - 13 Apr 2005 18:12 GMT

> Thanks so much. This is the sort of context thing I've been looking
> for.
>
> Am I correct that "ADO" precedes "DAO"? That DAO is the one that
> supports non Jet databases, etc? I sort of had an idea that the were
> in alphabetical order so to speak.

You have it backwards. DAO preceeded ADO and ADO is the more generic of the
two.

Signature

I don't check the Email account attached
to this message. Send instead to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com

Reply to this Message