It looks bizarre alright!!!

I suppose it's a long shot that the keyboard might have an intermittent disorder, but don't overlook it.

I'd suspect there's more than Word and Outlook running - systray stuff - and that something there *could* interfere (I noticed someone else also mentioned 'disability' stuff).

Could there be some keyboard re-mapping in effect?

Finally, is it possible that some user setting (pointer, I-beam,???) or color scheme is making it look like it isn't entering the field when actually it is?

Make sure you let us know when you find out, and GOOD LUCK




>Thanks Mike, but I don't distribute the scx's and sct's and the person who would have done possibility 2 would have to have been me, and I assure you, I didn't.
>
>It gets even more bizarre now. I wasn't able to visit the client because their building was in 'lockdown', so we went over it on the phone - stroke by stroke. Now, the only difference between adding a new item and editing an existing item, is that some fields will come up blank on a new add. Otherwise, the form is the same form either way, so of course, it has the same tab order either way. Note, I said the same form, not a similar one. When the client edits an existing record, the tab order is as expected. When adding a new item, tab order fields 4, 5, 6 and 7, are skipped entirely. At no time does the tab key instruct the cursor to land on any one of those fields. There is no logical reason for this (other clients do not experience this behaviour), nor is there a coding reason for this that I can see. And again, as originally stated, on my computer, and on my colleague's computer (he has only the runtime, just like the client does), the tab order remains proper, as laid
> out, regardless of whether it is a new add, or an edit.
>
>The only apps that seem to be running at the same time on the client's computers are Microsoft word and Microsoft Outlook. It's possible that the IT department is running stuff in the background, but I don't know that yet.
>
>I have never seen anything like this before (as I said, no other client is experiencing this).
>
>>Here are two possibilities. 1) There is a copy of the .scx and .sct files in the same folder as the exe on the client's machine. 2) Someone made a build, fixed a bug and re-created the build with the same version #'s and then dated that new build to match the buggy one. That way the mistaken build can be covered up or it was done that way cause it seemed like a good idea at the time.
>>
>>>>>>>>Has anybody ever heard of this?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>We installed a copy of our app at a client's office on 3 machines. On double checking, their copy of the exe is the same date, time and version as the one on my system.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>However, their tab order on one screen is different - different from mine, and different from the tab order defined in my development environment for that screen.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>There is no code in the Valid or LostFocus events of any of the controls that might change the focus of the 'next' control from the normal tab order.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I'm at a complete loss in trying to come up with any possible reasons why this might be happening. In fact, it seems downright impossible.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Anybody got any ideas?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Are you sure that the machine put on the queue one TAB for every keypress ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I know it runs properly on my pc and on my colleague's pc (he doesn't have the developement environment, just the runtimes). I can only assume that if we have the same exe, we should see the same tabbing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>you are a lot of optimist.
>>>>>
>>>>>I know what you mean, but thinking any other way makes me dizzy. ;)
>>>>
>>>>I understand, but the patter that you have shown (if I have understood well)
>>>>it happens with one shot him 4/5 tabs.
>>>>As I have seen more than once Excel go crazy in the movement of the cells...
>>>>
>>>>It checks that the window behaviour for the disabled persons it is not active.
>>>
>>>I'm going to go there tomorrow and see what the rest of the pattern looks like. I want to know if it's skipping tabs forever, or if it gets those skipped ones in a later part of the order.