| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 66921 | 2006-03-11 09:16:00 | MS Works backward comatibility | Brucem (8688) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 437446 | 2006-03-11 09:16:00 | For 8 years I have been operating a fairly large database (approx 100 fields & 300 records for a society, in MS Works 4.0. This has some disturbing habits including modifying filters, and dropping odd records. I am about to hand it on, and fear that future operators may be scarcely computer literate and therefore require as simple a system as possible. I have looked at shifting to Access. which I already use, but think others may not cope. We are looking to upgrade, but worry about Version 8 being able to read version 4.0 files. Does anyone know if this would work? Brucem |
Brucem (8688) | ||
| 437447 | 2006-03-12 06:55:00 | I can't answer your question directly but ver.7 will read works version 4.5. So the chances are that it will. The only problem is that works 7 with XP runs for me at about 1/3 the speed of 4.5 and Win 98. Its so sluggish at loading I am thinking of converting my old files to Open Office even if it means rewriting all my old spreadsheets. |
tutaenui (1724) | ||
| 437448 | 2006-03-12 07:55:00 | For 8 years I have been operating a fairly large database (approx 100 fields & 300 records for a society, in MS Works 4.0. Brucem A suggestion - maybe it is time for a redesign? Working with a flat table database is not very efficient and is very messy. You need not only to update to a new application but redesign as a relational database with multiple tables. Have a look at the new database features in OpenOffice2.0. |
johnd (85) | ||
| 437449 | 2006-03-12 23:24:00 | Even though I hate Microsoft Access, maybe it's time to "upgrade" to it . I guess I can't pass on making a observation: I've seen too many businesses get stung by creating business critical databases in Works / Access / Excel . I remember a medical facility almost killing someone because of an Access database problem, and making front-page news . On another occasion, a very large company based parts of its financial system on Access, only to discover the database was corrupted beyond recovery . I know it's hard to justify a database server for a 300 record database, particularly for a society . Even Enterprise sized database servers get corrupted occasionally, though nothing like Works / Access / Excel . Like the professionals, make sure you have regular integrity checks, off-site backups, and don't make the media rotation schedule too frequent . |
kingdragonfly (309) | ||
| 437450 | 2006-03-14 19:07:00 | Thanks for the comments. I also hate Access although I am reasonably familiar with it and currently use a partly complete accounting system in Access, that I have developed. The Society committe has decided that it wishes to continue with Works, largely on the basis that future people may be barely coputer literate, although a properly developed Access system would be easier to use than Works. I am giving the job up and want out asap, although I have agreed to put the database onto a new version of Works and make any necessary adjustments to formlae etc. Brucem |
Brucem (8688) | ||
| 437451 | 2006-03-15 00:42:00 | It is Bill Gates standard practice that later versions can read files prepared in earlier versions but no way can an early version read 100% a file prepared in a later version. Know this applies to Works and Publisher. All to get you to buy the latest version. | FrankS (257) | ||
| 1 | |||||