Office 2003 Developer Tools (Access 2003)

Topic

New Reply

I was looking at the pricing for the new Office 2003 editions, and it seems that there is no longer an Office Developer Edition. Such tools as the Access runtime are now in the “Access 2003 Developer Extensions” and is only available as part of the “Visual Studio Tools for the Microsoft Office System”. Thing is, I can’t figure out how much this little Visual Studio Tools is going to cost. Anyone else figure it out yet?

Reply | Quote

Replies

I’m not sure they’ve announced the pricing for it yet, Mark. I’m also curious about the upgrade pricing, since I have previous developer editions. The pricing seems to ignore the developer edition upgrades completely.

Reply | Quote

Offhand, I’d say it doesn’t look good. Typical Microsoft. They want Access to be an Office product, but if you want to develop in it, then it’s not! I’ve been weighing the pros/cons of staying with the Developer Edition, but this may make my decision alot easier!

Reply | Quote

Well, the point is that in 2003, there *is* no “developer edition”, so you’re stuck with the tools added to VS. Of course, if you need to develop in and distribute an earlier version, you’re still going to need the developer edition for *that* version, so don’t give up on it too soon.

Reply | Quote

For me, the big advantage of having the Developer Editions has been the Access Runtime, which was a good selling point for small business, as they didn’t have to buy Access. But it seems like now it is harder and harder to maintain a Runtime install, what with reference problems, etc. As more and more businesses have Access now (or at least it seems that way), perhaps I can do without the runtime. A $200 premium to buy the Developer Edition in the past was tolerable, but who knows how much this new Visual Studio Tools will cost!

Reply | Quote

I would not recommend relying on users to have Access installed, since even if they do, the installed build may be different and the patches and service packs may not be the same. A runtime installation is the only way to make sure your application will actually run as expected on the other machine. If the licensing follows past history, there will be an upgrade price from Office Developer to Visual Studio somewhere along the way, as there has been in the past. It may not be be made fully apparent until the product is actually released, though, so I’m waiting to see.

Reply | Quote

Charlotte,

Can a runtime installation get the Office Updates from Microsoft website, or do you have to do another install?

Reply | Quote

I don’t know about 2003, but in the earlier runtimes, Office update did not patch them. With OXP, there was actually a patch for the runtime but the developer had to appy it and send out a new runtime.

Reply | Quote

I didn’t think it could be updated, but I wasn’t sure. Thanks.

Reply | Quote

I didn’t think it could be updated, but I wasn’t sure. Thanks.

Reply | Quote

I don’t know about 2003, but in the earlier runtimes, Office update did not patch them. With OXP, there was actually a patch for the runtime but the developer had to appy it and send out a new runtime.

Reply | Quote

Charlotte,

Can a runtime installation get the Office Updates from Microsoft website, or do you have to do another install?

Reply | Quote

I would not recommend relying on users to have Access installed, since even if they do, the installed build may be different and the patches and service packs may not be the same. A runtime installation is the only way to make sure your application will actually run as expected on the other machine. If the licensing follows past history, there will be an upgrade price from Office Developer to Visual Studio somewhere along the way, as there has been in the past. It may not be be made fully apparent until the product is actually released, though, so I’m waiting to see.

Reply | Quote

For me, the big advantage of having the Developer Editions has been the Access Runtime, which was a good selling point for small business, as they didn’t have to buy Access. But it seems like now it is harder and harder to maintain a Runtime install, what with reference problems, etc. As more and more businesses have Access now (or at least it seems that way), perhaps I can do without the runtime. A $200 premium to buy the Developer Edition in the past was tolerable, but who knows how much this new Visual Studio Tools will cost!

Reply | Quote

Well, the point is that in 2003, there *is* no “developer edition”, so you’re stuck with the tools added to VS. Of course, if you need to develop in and distribute an earlier version, you’re still going to need the developer edition for *that* version, so don’t give up on it too soon.

Reply | Quote

Offhand, I’d say it doesn’t look good. Typical Microsoft. They want Access to be an Office product, but if you want to develop in it, then it’s not! I’ve been weighing the pros/cons of staying with the Developer Edition, but this may make my decision alot easier!

Reply | Quote

I’m not sure they’ve announced the pricing for it yet, Mark. I’m also curious about the upgrade pricing, since I have previous developer editions. The pricing seems to ignore the developer edition upgrades completely.

Reply | Quote