Klatuu said:
In addition to a possible corruption problem, Microsoft recommends you not
go
directly from 97 to 2003. They recommend a two step process 97 to 2000
then
2000 to 2003.
I not heard the above advice. Considering that acesss2000, 20002, and 2003
ALL DEFAULT to the Same access 2000 format, I can't see why this step would
be suggested?
I see little, if any advantage of converting to a2000, and THEN to a2003.
Really, can't think of any advantage here....
However, it certainly suggested that when converting form access 1.0, or
2.0, then converting to access97 is a suggested idea, since access 97 did
have some features built in that aid in this converting. Further, access97
has roots *closer* to the very old and original versions.
Funny, but MS even came out with a 2.0 converting add-in for a2003 (so, this
means their is some VERY old applications out that are being converted!!!).
However, I don't believe there is any difference when converting from a97 to
a2000, or a2003.
I am open to suggestions, or being corrected on this issue..but I not seen
it suggested that anything at all is gained by converting to a2000, and THEN
a2003....