When you maximize a form in Access 2003 the Title area around the form is not longer visible. With it no longer visible you no longer have a restore icon that will allow you to unmaximize the form. How then do you unmaizimize a form once it has been maximized.

Do you have a menu bar displayed?

Yes

If you have not disable it, then restore button should be on the menu bar under the Access Window's control buttons.

Well the problem appears to be form specific. I translated this application from 2007, down to Access 2003. Things don't work as you described in for this form, but I opened up a test database and created a form in it and it works as you described. The minimize, restore and close icons are there on the same line as the forms main menu when not maximized, but not with the form I originally asked about.

Any ideas?

Scratch my last message. It is not form specific, but application specific. The same things happesn on all forms in the database.

Hi,
and you don't have the close/min/max buttons disabled in the form's property dialog? I can't reproduce the behavior. Can you attach the application so I can test it on my system (keep it under 500kb and zipped)?
HTH
Good luck

The close/min/max properties are set correctly. Did you see my earlier message about this application being translated down from Access 2007.

I will attach a ziped file. Thank you for your help and interest.

Yes...I created a new application in the 2003 mdb file format in Acc2007 and used DoCmd.Maximize in the on open event of the form. I started the application with Acc2003 and it behaves as expected.
What form am I supposed to look at?
HTH
Good luck

This was a 2007 format database that was saved into 2003 format. Is that correct?

When I opened you database. on any form, in any mode, then min,restore, and close button are gone. Even in design mode there gone!

>When I opened your database. on any form, in any mode, then min,restore, and close button are gone. Even in >design mode there gone

That's it! <grin>

Once you mazimize a form, they're gone. I'm sorry, I should have mentioned in my earlier post that the form that everything else evolves around is frm001.

I have been working in 2007 now for half a year or more and am beginning to feel comfortable with it. I am just beginning to work with 2003. I thought that if I made the 2007 app into a 2003 app and made the 2003 app work as well as it could in 2003 that this would be a good way to get up on 2003 issues. But, my logic may be flawed. There may not be good backward compatibility.

Basically, it seems to me, that except for Menu/Ribbon issues, the 2003 version is very much like 2007. There may be other and maybe better ways to get up on 2003 issues that what I'm doing. If you see the problem and can tell me how to fix it, fine, and thank you, that will be most helpful. But if not, maybe I need to change my method for getting up on 2003.

Thank you both again for your time and interest.

To try to fix the 2003 issue, I would create a new blank MDB in 2003 and then import all the object into the the new blank database. You will also need to be sure and set the references.


What type of issues in 2003 are you looking for?

These may help:

Converting to Access 2007 See the "What's fixed (old issues solved)" section.

Because one can't be up on everything all the time I had a choice to make when I first started using Access. Should I start with 2007 or 2003? I started with 2007. I am feeling comfortable with 2007 now.

However, much of the Access work that is available has to do with applications built in earlier versions. Now that I am comfortable in 2007 I think it is time to make myelf familiar with 2003. So far, it seems that because I am up on 2007, 2003 should not be too difficult. One main thing that is different, of course, is menues as opposed to Ribbons. It appears Menus will be considerably easier to deal with than Ribbons.

Other areas that have caught my attention in 2003 have to do with using SQL Server as the back-end. I have worked in SQL Server for 3 years. It is hard to tell but it appears to me that Microsoft has changed their strategy from Access 2003 to 2007. It appears to me that the best choice (for the client) if they really need a big back-end database is to direct them to SQL and .Net. I have also worked in .Net for 3 years.

But really, most of the kind of applications that I want to do (small business, half million records or less) seem to be handled quite well in just regular Access accdb files. Y/N? I enjoy Access much more than .NET. It just does what you want it to when you want it to without a whole lot of fanfare. Very Pleasant.

Are there other things in Access 2003 that might be a challange, after coming from 2007?

IMHO, no.



That is true! They are enhancing the ability to work with SQL server in Office 2007 with SQL Server 2005.

I think you may be confusing the support for Data Access Pages (DAP) to create a web based front end with SQL Sever front end support.


From Miscrosoft:

From Migration considerations for Access 2007

I very much appreciate the Migration Considerations link. This helped the light to go on for me. Forgive me but even though Access does not have the complexity of .NET or the like, there are still many things that you don't just pick up right way when trying to understand how it works. Let me parrot back to you what I think is being said and see if you think I've got it right.

ADP was a way of connecting to SQL server used in Access 2003. Now there are two ways to connect to SQL server via Access 2007; Linking and ADP's. Linking is the preferred way and ADP's have become somewhat obsolete. Additionally, it sounds like even the Access accdb format is still considered jet technology; beefed up, but still Jet. Y/N?

If all of the above is right, let me ask a question. Is there much of a differnce, pratically speaking, in using an Access accdb as a back end and in using SQL Server? I mean I know that Access has a field type that SQL server doesn't like, but I don't use it anyway. I recently built an applciation using accdb as the backend. If I had done in in SQL Server instead would there have been substantial tricks or traps? I have worked with SQL Server for almost four years. I am no DBA but I understand the basics and have a paid copy of SQL Server Developer edition. Access accdb is just so easy to use that when I am talking about tables that are 250,000 rows or less I see every reason to use it. But is SQL Server is not Truely a pain, for some clients, perhaps I shoudl consider it more. I had just about decicded to suggest that clients that have true needs for SQL Server as a back-end, I say, I had just about decided to tell them to use .NET as the front end.