Fill series, down, right commands for Access 2007

[chuck]

How do you utilize the fill commands in access 2007 like is in 2003 "wdb"
files.

 

[pietlinden]

How do you utilize the fill commands in access 2007 like is in 2003 "wdb"
files.

AFAIK, it doesn't have any... FillDown and FillRight are EXCEL
functions.

 

[chuck]

the 2003 three version is a database not an excel file and has these commands
-- is there any way around this deficiency in 2007

 

[John W. Vinson]

How do you utilize the fill commands in access 2007 like is in 2003 "wdb"
files.

Access is a relational database. Works is really more a spreadsheet. "Fill
down" and "fill across" are spreadsheet operations, but a relational database
table (even though it looks like one) is *not* a spreadsheet, doesn't work
like a spreadsheet, and should not be used like a spreadsheet!

If you want spreadsheet functionality and a single table, use Excel or Works
(or one of the many other spreadsheet programs available). To use Access, you
may need to do some studying - it is a *different program* and requires a
different mindset, and somewhat of a steep learning curve.

You can get started at

Jeff Conrad's resources page:
http://www.accessmvp.com/JConrad/accessjunkie/resources.html

The Access Web resources page:
http://www.mvps.org/access/resources/index.html

A free tutorial written by Crystal (MS Access MVP):
http://allenbrowne.com/casu-22.html

MVP Allen Browne's tutorials:
http://allenbrowne.com/links.html#Tutorials

 

[chuck]

thanks -- I don't think this office product can do what I was hoping which is
combine the database functionality as well as have some of the controls of
the spreadsheet.

 

[John W. Vinson]

thanks -- I don't think this office product can do what I was hoping which is
combine the database functionality as well as have some of the controls of
the spreadsheet.

Access and Excel can work together very nicely - of course it's more work to
do so than to use either app by itself, but it can be done. Perhaps if you'ld
post a description of the business problem you're trying to solve someone
could make a suggestion.

 

[chuck]

It's a very simple application and I don't really want to create more work
for myself. I have data entry to do where two fields work easiest when I can
fill the column by the fill series command adding one to the above cell. Also
some fields have repeated entry of the same info ie. Dr.'s name for mutliple
clients. I like the 2007 database functions which is why I asked if the
commands were available somewhere in there.

 

[chuck]

This would be true but the +1 fields are not continuos throughout the doc. --
at the most the blocks of numbers might be like 20 and the next time I enter
the database the number might start 150 further into the series.
as for the dr. name field -- I don't even need the field if it's the same
dr. -- this application is when there are more than three drs. in the same
database.
If you don't mind keep suggesting cause I think I getting closer or even new
ideas

 

[chuck]

an example of the numbering might be entries from 16252-16280 and then the
next numbers I enter could be 16552-16559

 

[John W. Vinson]

It's a very simple application and I don't really want to create more work
for myself. I have data entry to do where two fields work easiest when I can
fill the column by the fill series command adding one to the above cell.

If you use a Form you can very easily have a field increment... or if you
don't mind some gaps in the numbering you can use an Autonumber field.

Also
some fields have repeated entry of the same info ie. Dr.'s name for mutliple
clients.

That sounds like a good case for actually using Access as it is designed:
relationally. You could have a table of Doctors (with one record per doctor),
a table of Clients (with one record per client), and a third table to relate
them, using a form with combo boxes or other suitable tools to match them up.

I like the 2007 database functions which is why I asked if the
commands were available somewhere in there.

It may be more productive to actually use Access as it was designed, rather
than treating it as a flawed implementation of Works.

 

[chuck]

That's what I was figuring thanks for the input

If you use a Form you can very easily have a field increment... or if you
don't mind some gaps in the numbering you can use an Autonumber field.


That sounds like a good case for actually using Access as it is designed:
relationally. You could have a table of Doctors (with one record per doctor),
a table of Clients (with one record per client), and a third table to relate
them, using a form with combo boxes or other suitable tools to match them up.


It may be more productive to actually use Access as it was designed, rather
than treating it as a flawed implementation of Works.

 

[Larry Linson]

Steve, I'm sure spreadsheet users are just falling all over themselves to go
to all that work to avoid using the fill, down-arrow, and right-arrow
features. No wonder those experienced users here do not have a high opinion
of your answers.

Larry