Prev: Why Do 2 Rows Disappear from my DataGridView?
Next: RollUp by Date
From: GS on 26 Apr 2010 17:19
Karl E. Peterson formulated on Monday :
> GS wrote:
>> Fact is, it won't surprise me at all if M$ switches from using VBA as their
>> built-in macro language to some .Net/Silverlight spin-off! -Again, nothing
>> new there either.
>
> They'd very much like to! But they can't. The ship sinks when Office
> upgrades stall.

Karl,
That's nice to know for now. At least it gives those of us using VBA or
automating it with VB some time yet. I was suggesting, though, that
sooner or later they'll find a way to dump it!

I was steered to the 9 page article you link to below (in this thread)
by Rob Bovey some time ago. As you state there it's very "eye opening".
-Makes me want to run away and find another solution! In my case VBA is
where I started programming due to client requests for Excel based
solutions. That's how I met Rob, who put me onto VB6 to compliment what
I was doing with Excel. Now that M$ is making yet again many more
significant changes that directly affect our forward programming
ability AND our legacy apps, kinda makes me a bit shy to hurry up and
jump onto the band wagon.

A bit off topic.., but have you seen any docs on whether both 32-bit
and 64-bit MSO will coexist without issue on the same machine?
(specifically Win7 64-bit) I know multiple 32-bit versions can coexist
without issue on the same machine. I'm suspecting the 32-bit version
would be installed in (x86) and use that registry while the 64-bit
would install and use its own registry. It would be nice to work on
both platforms on the same machine, but I suspect VM might have to be a
part of that equation.

Garry
--


From: Karl E. Peterson on 26 Apr 2010 17:46
GS wrote:
> Karl E. Peterson formulated on Monday :
>> GS wrote:
>>> Fact is, it won't surprise me at all if M$ switches from using VBA as
>>> their built-in macro language to some .Net/Silverlight spin-off! -Again,
>>> nothing new there either.
>>
>> They'd very much like to! But they can't. The ship sinks when Office
>> upgrades stall.
>
> That's nice to know for now. At least it gives those of us using VBA or
> automating it with VB some time yet. I was suggesting, though, that sooner or
> later they'll find a way to dump it!

They'll have to find a way to monetize what others are giving away,
first. Not saying it won't happen, but their history there isn't
great. The thing is, VBA is solidly *entrenched* in the Enterprise
world, as it drives most of the templates in widesread corporate use
today. Remember, this upcoming release was to be the one where VBA
"finally" went away, but then MSFT was reminded of reality and blinked
(VBA7).

> A bit off topic.., but have you seen any docs on whether both 32-bit and
> 64-bit MSO will coexist without issue on the same machine? (specifically Win7
> 64-bit) I know multiple 32-bit versions can coexist without issue on the same
> machine. I'm suspecting the 32-bit version would be installed in (x86) and
> use that registry while the 64-bit would install and use its own registry. It
> would be nice to work on both platforms on the same machine, but I suspect VM
> might have to be a part of that equation.

I really don't know. In fact, I didn't know multiple 32's could
co-exist. I'm running w7x64 here, with Office 2007 installed in the
main machine and Office 2003 installed in a WVPC VM. It sort of makes
sense that you could do a SxS with 32/64, but I'd imagine there'd be
contention for some resources as well as the very high liklihood that
MSFT simply doesn't do any better job of converting all of Office to
x64 than they did bringing Win95 to Win32.

--
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org


From: GS on 26 Apr 2010 20:03
> They'll have to find a way to monetize what others are giving away, first.
> Not saying it won't happen, but their history there isn't great. The thing
> is, VBA is solidly *entrenched* in the Enterprise world, as it drives most of
> the templates in widesread corporate use today. Remember, this upcoming
> release was to be the one where VBA "finally" went away, but then MSFT was
> reminded of reality and blinked (VBA7).

I could agree with you there!

> I really don't know. In fact, I didn't know multiple 32's could co-exist.
> I'm running w7x64 here, with Office 2007 installed in the main machine and
> Office 2003 installed in a WVPC VM. It sort of makes sense that you could do
> a SxS with 32/64, but I'd imagine there'd be contention for some resources as
> well as the very high liklihood that MSFT simply doesn't do any better job of
> converting all of Office to x64 than they did bringing Win95 to Win32.

Yeah, I didn't want to go with using VM nor separate machines for
working with MSO v8 through v12. I set my machines up for installing
the earlier versions same as when the M$ installers started allowing
you to keep your previous version. -It's just a matter of setting up
separate folders for each version ahead of time and then set the
install path to the right one during setup.

I really don't develop for M$O8 anymore so I haven't installed it on
the last two machines I bought. I have v9 through v12 on my XP 32-bit
machine. I've only put v11 & v12 on my Win7x64 machine since those are
the most common among my clients. I will need to put both 2010 versions
on somewhere and so is why I'm asking. It's just a lot more convenient
for me to have them all in the same box! I have no doubt the 32-bit
will go on either machine, but I don't want any nasty surprises with
the Win7x64 machine because it's the only one I have and I'm not
looking for headaches to find a place to happen.<g>


From: Karl E. Peterson on 26 Apr 2010 20:23
GS wrote:
>> I really don't know. In fact, I didn't know multiple 32's could co-exist.
>> I'm running w7x64 here, with Office 2007 installed in the main machine and
>> Office 2003 installed in a WVPC VM. It sort of makes sense that you could
>> do a SxS with 32/64, but I'd imagine there'd be contention for some
>> resources as well as the very high liklihood that MSFT simply doesn't do
>> any better job of converting all of Office to x64 than they did bringing
>> Win95 to Win32.
>
> Yeah, I didn't want to go with using VM nor separate machines for working
> with MSO v8 through v12.

It's not so bad, especially with a x64 box and lots of RAM. <g>

> I set my machines up for installing the earlier
> versions same as when the M$ installers started allowing you to keep your
> previous version. -It's just a matter of setting up separate folders for each
> version ahead of time and then set the install path to the right one during
> setup.

I didn't know that! When did that become possible?

> I really don't develop for M$O8 anymore so I haven't installed it on the last
> two machines I bought. I have v9 through v12 on my XP 32-bit machine. I've
> only put v11 & v12 on my Win7x64 machine since those are the most common
> among my clients. I will need to put both 2010 versions on somewhere and so
> is why I'm asking. It's just a lot more convenient for me to have them all in
> the same box! I have no doubt the 32-bit will go on either machine, but I
> don't want any nasty surprises with the Win7x64 machine because it's the only
> one I have and I'm not looking for headaches to find a place to happen.<g>

I understand. The x64 world is one of no-turning-back, it seems, once
you get there. But there are hurdles. I'm still grumbling at a lot of
"little stuff." (For instance, why does the File-Add dialog in WinZip
9.0 automatically stuff "*.*" into the filename box in Win32, but not
in Win64??? <grrrrr>)

--
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org


From: GS on 26 Apr 2010 20:52
Karl E. Peterson used his keyboard to write :
> GS wrote:
>>> I really don't know. In fact, I didn't know multiple 32's could co-exist.
>>> I'm running w7x64 here, with Office 2007 installed in the main machine
>>> and Office 2003 installed in a WVPC VM. It sort of makes sense that you
>>> could do a SxS with 32/64, but I'd imagine there'd be contention for some
>>> resources as well as the very high liklihood that MSFT simply doesn't do
>>> any better job of converting all of Office to x64 than they did bringing
>>> Win95 to Win32.
>>
>> Yeah, I didn't want to go with using VM nor separate machines for working
>> with MSO v8 through v12.
>
> It's not so bad, especially with a x64 box and lots of RAM. <g>
>
>> I set my machines up for installing the earlier versions same as when the
>> M$ installers started allowing you to keep your previous version. -It's
>> just a matter of setting up separate folders for each version ahead of time
>> and then set the install path to the right one during setup.
>
> I didn't know that! When did that become possible?

Not sure! I just learned how in my 2nd year programming VBA. It was
posted by someone in the Excel NG late '04 or early '05. Turns out
M$O10 had an option to keep part or all of the previous version. That's
what sent me looking for a way to do the same with the earlier
versions. I use the Office Toolbar from v9 and have separate buttons
for each version. Fortunately they started using different icons for
each version since v11 and so it's only the earlier links that look the
same. No big deal since I've them lined up in ascending order left to
right.<g>

>> I really don't develop for M$O8 anymore so I haven't installed it on the
>> last two machines I bought. I have v9 through v12 on my XP 32-bit machine.
>> I've only put v11 & v12 on my Win7x64 machine since those are the most
>> common among my clients. I will need to put both 2010 versions on somewhere
>> and so is why I'm asking. It's just a lot more convenient for me to have
>> them all in the same box! I have no doubt the 32-bit will go on either
>> machine, but I don't want any nasty surprises with the Win7x64 machine
>> because it's the only one I have and I'm not looking for headaches to find
>> a place to happen.<g>
>
> I understand. The x64 world is one of no-turning-back, it seems, once you
> get there. But there are hurdles. I'm still grumbling at a lot of "little
> stuff." (For instance, why does the File-Add dialog in WinZip 9.0
> automatically stuff "*.*" into the filename box in Win32, but not in Win64???
> <grrrrr>)

I can't speak to that because I'm at WinZip 14.5, though I notice even
in 32-bit apps running on Winx64 in x86 that behaviors are drastically
different in lots of ways. I don't have any x64 apps as yet so I can't
speak to that either. (Actually, I suspect WinZip probably will
recognize the x64 and install accordingly but I haven't loaded it yet)

I do suspect, though, it will be interesting when I install
M$O2010x32/x64.


First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Why Do 2 Rows Disappear from my DataGridView?
Next: RollUp by Date