[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       mdbtools-dev
Subject:    Re: [mdb-dev] "A discussion of what's new in Access 12"
From:       Brian Bruns <brian.bruns () gmail ! com>
Date:       2005-10-17 13:22:02
Message-ID: e6e7f2330510170622l48115909o () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Interesting.

The key words are "The new version is fully backwards compatible with the
old, so it will read & write files from earlier versions without any
problems". Does this mean the core database format remains the same, or is
this the old "save as access 97 format" trick? I'm hoping for the former.
There were solid reasons for changing from JET3 to JET4 (unicode) but
they've stuck with JET4 through two versions and I don't see any obvious
reason to scrap it now.

The complex data thing seems more relevent to userland (Access) then to the
core engine. Maybe we can look forward to a few new system tables and that'=
s
it, hopefully.

Brian

2005/10/17, Martin Ellis <m.a.ellis@ncl.ac.uk>:
>
>
> Thought this might be of interest to readers here:
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/access/
>
> Cheers
> Martin
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
> and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> mdbtools-dev mailing list
> mdbtools-dev@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mdbtools-dev
>

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

Interesting.&nbsp; <br>

<br>

The key words are &quot;The new version is fully backwards compatible with
the old, so it will
read &amp; write files from earlier versions without any
problems&quot;.&nbsp; Does this mean the core database format remains the
same, or is this the old &quot;save as access 97 format&quot; trick?&nbsp; I'm
hoping for the former.&nbsp; There were solid reasons for changing from
JET3 to JET4 (unicode) but they've stuck with JET4 through two versions
and I don't see any obvious reason to scrap it now.<br>

<br>

The complex data thing seems more relevent to userland (Access) then to
the core engine.&nbsp; Maybe we can look forward to a few new system
tables and that's it, hopefully.<br>

<br>

Brian<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2005/10/17, Martin Ellis &lt;<a \
href="mailto:m.a.ellis@ncl.ac.uk">m.a.ellis@ncl.ac.uk</a>&gt;:</span><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt \
0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <br>Thought this might be of interest to readers \
here:<br><br><a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/access/">http://blogs.msdn.com/access/</a> \
<br><br>Cheers<br>Martin<br><br><br>-------------------------------------------------------
 <br>This SF.Net email is sponsored by:<br>Power Architecture Resource Center: Free \
content, downloads, discussions,<br>and more. <a \
href="http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl">http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
 </a><br>_______________________________________________<br>mdbtools-dev mailing \
list<br><a href="mailto:mdbtools-dev@lists.sourceforge.net">mdbtools-dev@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br><a \
href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mdbtools-dev"> \
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mdbtools-dev</a><br></blockquote></div><br>



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
mdbtools-dev mailing list
mdbtools-dev@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mdbtools-dev

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]