I have multiple documents & UserForms all of which are driven by VBA code. None of them work on Windows XP SP3 machines. This is despite the fact that they are all running Office 2010. Everytime is errors saying 'Missing microsoft activex data objects 6.1 library'.
Everything except the latest version points to a type library that limits what functionality you can use, so you don't use new features after that version. However, all these type libraries point to the latest DLL on your system, 2.8 in this case. Windows 2000 came with ADO 2.5, so if you choose ADO 2.5, you technically don't need to install MDAC on Windows 2000 and after, and that means smaller downloads. However, all of your testing is going against ADO version 2.8, so if you don't distribute MDAC 2.8, users who have lesser versions might see issues that were fixed in 2.8. So the best practice is to distribute the same MDAC version as the highest you see in the list, 2.8, except on Vista and after, since Vista and after come with ADO 6.0, just like the OS version.I would choose ADO 2.5 without distributing MDAC, and deal with any errors that customers with lower versions might report, or test on these versions.See also this blog entry by Tony Toews about this issue:I've never quite trusted ADO because... -ve-never-quite-trusted-ado-because.aspx
activex data objects 6.0 library download
DOWNLOAD: https://ssurll.com/2vCvFf
The simple answer to the question is yes. Pick the version of ADO youwant to use and ignore MDAC.A more detailed and really boring answer follows. [You can easily andsafely exit here.]When ADO was introduced and for most of its history it was supportedby a team separate from the development or system groups. It hadseparate release cycles from any other product. Products that shippedwith MDAC, included whatever current version was available and couldbe later updated with subsequent MDAC releases.The MDAC was the keystone of what Microsoft called "Universal Access",the idea of a single assortment of tools providing access to any datasource through a single access library. ODBC had gone a long way toproviding this sort of functionality, but ODBC was tied to a singlehierarchical data model - ADO and OLE DB removed this limitation.To implement this grand strategy MS adopted its other rising star -COM - that's where and why OLE is so much a major player.A major point of confusion is that while MDAC releases were/are namedafter the most current version of ADO (the ActiveX Data Objects) theysupported - the MDAC is actually a package of diverse though relatedcomponents - the principle catagories being OLE 'system' support, OLEDB components and OLE DB Providers, and the ADO data access library.(These packages originally also included ISAM and ODBC drivers, andthe DAO data access library, ie - one-stop shopping for all dataaccess.)The strategy was grand and ambitious. Perhaps too ambitious asproblems appeared almost immediately in trying to keep such a diverseasssortment of tools all current (and provide bug fixes and upgrades)in a single package. Or perhaps it was mostly marketing and MS neverreally expected it to be all that Universal in the first place.One problem was the ADO data access libraries, the second was theimprovement and fixes of the OLE/OLE DB components. While ADO itselfis essentially non-system dependent, OLE is totally system dependent,and OLE DB was product dependent as well as having a foot in both ADOand OLE.It would take too long to document all the various changes to theMDAC package in its migration from a 'universal' store house to a'specific' ADO/OLE tool, and such information isreadily available on the web, but to highlight a few ...The ADO libraries improved in features and needed bug fixes thefastest . (Probably why MDAC releases were named after ADO versions.)To manage this MS adopted the strategy to provide a single namedcomponent that supplied multiple interfaces. This simplified fourthings: 1) With each new ADO release MS simply provided a new interface to theexisting component, 2) Each version had many features in common with previous versions.Keeping them in the same component meant they only had to have one setof code for all,3) as bug fixes and improvements often affected more that one versionof ADO they could provide those fixes at a single point,4) they avoided having multiple versions laying around - one filereplaced the old. Each new release provides support for all previous versions of ADO.Stop and think what the packages might have looked like if MS hadn'tadopted this strategy. We could have had ... msado15.dll msado2.dll msado2b.dll msado25.dll msado25b.dll msado25c.dll msado25d.dll msado26.dll msado26b.dll msado26c.dll msado27.dll msado27b.dll msado28.dll msado28b.dll ...If having multiple interfaces for one component confused developersjust imagine what a mess the above would have been.The same problems existed for the OLE components and MS adopted thesame strategy. For different O/Ss (and the OLE components) MS simplyprovided separate MDAC packages. That's why there is a different onefor Win2000 and below and another one for XP. (Both labeled '2.8' bythe way.)For partly political reasons (MS announced the death of DAO severaltimes and really wanted to push migration to SQL server) and simplybecause the under-lying technology and dependences were so different,DAO, ISAM, and ODBC was removed from the MDAC. Those components aresupplied in separate JET packages.The MDAC has confused and caused doubt for years for otherwisecompetent developers (Mr. Toews's article an excellent example), andfor absolutely NO reason. A zillion bytes have been wasted when therule has ALWAYS been very simple and valid from Day One. Pick theversion of ADO you want to use. If a client doesn't have thecomponents to support that version then have them download or supplythe latest 'n greatest MDAC package - NO MATTER WHAT VERSION OF ADOYOU ARE USING.In general, previous to Vista, every client and developer has alwaysbeen advised to download the most current MDAC package appropriate fortheir system. Not necessarily to support a higher version of ADO butto take advantage of improvements and fixes for both ADO and OLE.Again - NO MATTER WHAT VERSION OF ADO A PARTICULAR PRODUCT IS USING.A developer can also take it as a general rule to develop against ADO2.5. This is because 1) after all this time it is the most stable, 2) the most clients already have it no matter what platform they areusing, and 3) 2.5 provides the bulk of the features a developercommonly uses. But this really has little to do with MDAC, except obviously theclient has to have an MDAC installed that has the components tosupports the version of ADO a program uses. But if everyone simplyinstalls the latest 'n greatest - then it was not, is not, nor shouldit ever be, a problem. [there were a few issues with 2.6, thus thesubsquent quick release of 2.7 and 2.7rtm, followed by their equallyquick demise with the release of 2.8.]IMHO If a developer knows his targets are XP and above then should useADO 2.8, but the advantage is only additonal features (which asalready noted you likely won't need but nice to have if you do. )and by now it is equally stable. And last - all of this is becoming a non-issue since MS now includesADO and OLE/OLE DB as part of Vista and Win7 supplied components (andupdated by SPs and not from a separate 'universal' package). MDAC isgone. So pick any version of ADO you want* it will be supported.MS also now supply OLE DB providers as separate downloads. OLE DB andOLE is likely to remain a platform supported feature.Whew!-ralph[* I don't advise picking anything previous to 2.5 as there aredifferences in behavior and not all the bugs have been fixed.]
Manual microsoft activex data objects 2 7 libraryCreating ado objects in visual basic. it contains updated documentation, headers, libs and typelibs for x86, ia64 and amd64 platforms, as well as updated sample applications and developer tools. 6 library > - microsoft activex data objects 2. i am building an excel wb on windows 7 and excel. microsoft activex data objects 6. 8 sdk is for developers who are building applications using ado, ole db, and odbc. microsoft activex data objects 2. the ado version depends on your windows operating system, viz. 1 library ( msado15. 0 library > - microsoft activex data objects 2. 0 library for windows vista, and microsoft activex data objects 2.
1 library - download site. however for whatever reason i re- added it and now the test code ( and prod app) work perfectly. consequently the program will not compile. qroozn well- known member. joined messages 543. 0 object library ( or later) microsoft dao 3. 5 object library ( or later) click ok.
i' m just starting to use sql and need to use the microsoft activex data objects library. dll) to remove it as a variable from my test case and still saw the exact same behaviour, hence me discounting it. 8) microsoft data access components ( mdac) include three technologies for accessing data: activex data objects ( ado), ole db, and open database connectivity ( odbc). 7 library > - microsoft activex data objects 2. the template is referenced manual microsoft activex data objects 2 7 library to the adobe acrobat browser control and the acropdf object is available in the toolbox. i had unticked microsoft activex data objects 6. i have now migrated the vba application to officebit) and although the template is still referenced to the adobe reader control, the acropdf object is not available in the toolbox. 1 and am using a disconnected recordset. i' m trying to figure out which one to use. i see in my references dropdown various versions of it 2. verify that at least the following libraries are also selected: visual basic for applications. 2ff7e9595c
Comments