Access 2000 to Access 2013 - Annoyed by reduced usability in 2013 - or am I missing something ?

[Mikkil]

Folks,



I'm a newbie - 1st post - but have been using Access 2000 for 7/8 years. I like the tabs in Access 2000 that allow you in a click to flick between object types In Access 2013, it's unwieldy and slow .

I've just tried to do a report in Access 2013 - and gave up. I'm not great at doing reports in Access 2000, but I could eventually get there. I don't have to do reports.

Access 2013 in general seems, to me, to be a step backwards. They had it right in Access 2000, and to changed it - as if to charge you again for the same product, they made it harder to use.

I'd run Access 2000 in Windows 10, if I could, but of course I can't.

If I've no options, please advise of an alternative to Access 2013 (and I'm assuming it's not Access 2016!).

Thanks in advance,

Mick

p.s. I started on Cobol-74, so I've an idea of what's good (I loved WinEdit) and great (VB6).

[CJ_London]

I'd run Access 2000 in Windows 10, if I could, but of course I can't.

you can run access 2000 under windows 10 - but if you are using a later version of Office, access 2000 will not be able to interact with the different apps.

please advise of an alternative to Access 2013

simply, there isn't one, access is unique. At least not without starting from the bottom again. You could take a look at Base in Libre Office or just google 'alternatives to access' - e.g. https://comparecamp.com/microsoft-access-alternatives/

Just be aware that many think of access as a database. It's not, it is a RAD tool which will interact with many databases. It just happens to come with a JET (now ACE) file based database you can use if you don't want to use a more sophisticated back end.

[Mikkil]

Thank you Ajax, I'll look into that.

However, it's annoying if I have to load an older version of software, with some degree of difficulty, onto a newer O/S, for the same/not a better experience.

I'm assuming I'm missing out on Access 2013 functionality that will blow me away - or are Access users being treated less well, because there's less of us ?

I'm a functional thinker - if you have a good thing, why change it except to improve it ? Obviously making money is a criterion too, but it isn't all money, I hope.

Thanks

Mick

[CJ_London]

not sure why you would think that a later OS would improve the experience of an old app. 2000 has not been supported officially for the last 4 versions of the OS (since Vista I think)

Seems you have a negative view of access. I'm sure there are fewer people using 20 year old software but it is the most used rad tool in the world and MS fully supports it. With regards functionality, all depends on what you want to do. Basic concepts are the same, some new features are good, others less so. Really depends on what rocks your boat.

You might find this link of interest - https://www.fmsinc.com/MicrosoftAcce...y/features.htm

[Mikkil]

Ajax,

I did not think a later OS would improve the "old app" - I was making the point that the combination of newer software with a newer O/S was depriving me of a nice experience I had become used to.

I don't have a negative view of Access, I havn't found anything better, I liked the Human Computer Interaction of Access 2000 - and would like to have it again. I find Access 2013 to have gone "stylish" and lost "substance" - it does it nicer graphically, but it does less.

For example, I used to be able to highlight part of a field in Access 2000, click on a filter icon, and was shown only records with the field including the highlighted text - how is this done in Access 2013, if it can be done ?

I don't think Microsoft deliberately dis-improved Access, but sometimes the annoyance brings that thought,

Thanks for your input,

Mick

[CJ_London]

For example, I used to be able to highlight part of a field in Access 2000, click on a filter icon, and was shown only records with the field including the highlighted text - how is this done in Access 2013, if it can be done ?

highlight the text, right click and select 'Contains'

[Rickbale]

You should stick with Microsoft Access 2013

Reasons
Quick and easy to create database systems
Microsoft Access produces very user-friendly applications through its comprehensive programming language (VBA)
MS Access produces flexible and adaptable database systems
Well-known so you can get help and support easily
Microsoft Access has been around for a long time, so lots of expertise
Part of the Microsoft Office suite so fully integrated with the other Microsoft Office packages, like Word, Excel & Outlook
The capabilities of Access are constantly improving - now with good Cloud integration
Often included in your existing Microsoft licence - for business users at least
Scalable integration for large systems and expansion

Regards,
Rick Bale

[Mikkil]

Rick,

Thanks for your comments - and I agree with them.

My irritation with Access 2013 (for example) is for example, that in Access 2000, to flick between table, form, module etc. but in Access 2013, it meaning that it's clicking on a single tab in access 2000 to go from tables to queries, but in Access 2013, I've to change "Tables" at the top to "Queries", before the queries are listed, in a scrollable format only, rather than the option of across the screen as they could be, in Access 2000. Also there only appears to be an alphabetic ordering of all items; in Access 2000, you had a number of tas e.g. date created, date modified, Properties (comments) etc.

Maybe I don't know what to call these properties in 2013, but my point is, I don't have to find out, if the functionality has not been changed.

I'm a big fan of functionality - and things that work shouldn't go out of fashion,

Thanks

Mick

[Mikkil]

Rick,

I was able to paste pictures in the quick reply, but they don't appear above. A picture worth a thousand words etc. they were just after the reference to "single tab" and "Tables at the top" respectively.

Regards,

Mick

[Mikkil]

Rick,

And just tried again, in "Go Advanced" option in "AccessForums" Reply to Thread, and it accepted the pictures but doesn;t show them,

Regards,

Mick

[Mikkil]

Rick,

Finally worked - Access 2000 on the left.

Regards

Mick

[Minty]

@Mikkil - You can still sort and display by created and modified date

[Shadow9449]

Mikkil:

I still use Access 2003 on Win 10. I realize that it's not officially supported by Microsoft but for my own use, it works great. I've used Access 2010 and I do feel that the navigation is a step backward like you, and I've interacted with 2013 and I just find that everything is more sluggish, between development to running the application. Access 2003 uses the old interface that you prefer. I don't know if it's possible to get a legal copy of it today, but maybe give that a try if you prefer the old navigation?

[Micron]

After dabbling in Office apps since the days of 5 inch floppies I can sympathize with the sentiments being expressed. I think we get comfortable with the interface of an app and grumble when they "improve" it because the familiarity of it has to be re-learned. For me, the introduction of the ribbon was the most perplexing thing, which they no doubt introduced just so that all my menubar code and knowledge gained around that could be relegated to the trash heap. That was closely followed by all the changes in Word and Excel which were surely introduced just to confound the likes of me.

I could hold onto that premise or accept that change is here to stay and try to understand what drives it. It is easy to overlook the benefits of change by focusing on what we don't like that changed. AFAIK, beyond the calendar control and the ability to edit a linked spreadsheet (the latter being lost as the result of a successful suit upon M$) there isn't much in Access that was lost. It is more likely that to get to it takes a different path - and what we really don't like is having to learn a new one.

Hope that helps a bit.

[isladogs]

I've been using Access for over 25 years and over those years have tried every version released from v1.0 onwards.
Some versions have been excellent including (in my opinion) 2000, 2003 & 2010 whilst others have had issues that made me dislike them (all before 97, 2007 etc)
As Ajax has already said, you can do everything with the navigation pane interface in e.g. 2013 that you could with the old object browser in 2003. In fact you can do more than was previously the case.
Whilst it takes a while to go used to both the navigation pane and the ribbon, I would never want to return to the old interface.
Plus the ACCDB file format is far more secure than was the case with MDB files.

Anyway, the two screenshots below show exactly the functionality you seem to want. These are from A365 but the features were almost identical in A2013.





P.S. You're not the only one having issues uploading images. For some reason it rarely works from my tablet though its not a problem on other forums