Please delete the database database you have, if you would. Thank you for your very excellent help. I am back in business, and don’t have to reboot to win10!
I’ve deleted the online copy from mediafire.com. My local copy will go away when I reboot my computer.
I’m afraid that you are not back in business yet. The dBase connection is rather limited. For instance, it does not allow queries across multiple tables. dBase is editable (even with no primary keys) and you may be able to link tables by means of listboxes and subforms. However, the queries I see in the mdb-connected database indicate that you use queries across more than one table.
The connection to your original mdb file is read-only. I did not know that until right now. UcanAccess supports write access to the “modern” accdb databases but not to the older mdb files.
I’ve created a new database which is - analog to MS Access - embedded in the database document.
I copied each of the 4 table icons and pasted them one by one to the new database taking over the table stuctures only (no data). Then I added primary keys where they were missing. Base can not edit any tables lacking a primary key.
Finally I copied over the data into the prepared new tables.
I’ll send the resulting database to you my personal message.
Their site claims RW support of Access file formats from 2000-2003, which were MDBs. Only Access 97 file format is said to be supported in RO mode.
IMO, it is sad when people have this idea. Any program’s first and the primary reason of existence is implementing some functionality. Interoperability with other applications having similar functionality is secondary. And competing is even less important. Imagining that authors/developers of a software have nothing to implement on their own, but only try to mimic what others have in other software, would be sad.
I do not say this issue doesn’t deserve own attention. I just react to the explicitly expressed idea that LO’s main objective is not its own functionality, but trying to move people out of using another software.
I agree that the development of any program should be for that program, but market research of your intended audience should show that it is possible to “harvest” M$ users, no? The whole point of the OpenOffice drive was to “open” up the functionality that microsoft tried to fence off, i.e. to provide an attractive alternative, so implicitly set up competition. And I think they and their successors, e.g. Libreoffice, have done a magnificent job.
Actually NO. Let’s assume 1.000.000 users to be harvested. TDF will earn 1.000.000 * 0.00 $ from them and has now 1.000.000 new users expecting everything is like M$ did everything and not even knowing their docx files not being compliant with the written standard for this files, but to an extendedversion, not necessarily completely documented. Sounds like a lot of users not easily satisfied.
.
So let them decide, when and why they leave M$ - or why they stay.
I’m using this much longer than it is named OpenOffice or LibreOffice. And my reason was not to be bound to MS-Windows. With your 72 years you are even older than me, and could remember “there was life on earth before Microsoft” …
1 Like