>Jess,
>
>please accept ma apalogy for being way too harsh with you, sometimes I write without counting to ten. What really p.. me of, were your blunt statements:
>
>The claim of MS that Visual FoxPro 9.0 is the most stable release they have so far is now in question to me. Why? Service Pack 1 has some 200 bugs fixed and they're coming up with Service Pack 2 aside from SEDNA which I guess will also have lots of fixes included. Hopefully, yes, and how can you say this is negative?

The lesser the bugs the lesser SPs are created. And it is just one of the obvious reasons why the product is not yet stable. And I would say without SPs yet VFP 9.0 is not the most stable version.

>
>Worst, many of the reported bugs that were fixed are obvious and basic bugs which in the first place shouldn't be passing through first level of debugging. Can you give me as much as one sample?
>
>Reading the list of fixes of Service Pack 1, we have one bug that is so important to us that is not yet fixed: can't recognized legal size paper for some printer i.e. EPSON LX 300+, some HP Laserjets... Matrix printers has always been a PITA with all kinds of programs, without any exeception. Why blame VFP for this? And HP Laserjet printer drivers have always been famous for causing all kinds of problems with many programs, why do you blame VFP? First of all, blame HP for their terribly written drivers, and be grateful that Microsoft has written drivers to practically all HP printers which don't have these problems.

My goodness Tore, these printers are widely in use here in ASIA. As I have said, other reporting tools don't have similar problems whetherHP, dotMatrix or not, but with VFP9.0 it is a problem. In fact HPs are distributed worldwide not only in our area. Why on earth you are saying that VFP don't have any relation on this issue?

>We are then forced to set report behaviour to 80 which is awkward. Isn't it a good thing that they gave you that option. And is one line of code really that "awkward"?

It's 'awkward' because the REPORT Feature as introduced in 9.0 is rendered useless on our part.

>
>Is Visual FoxPro 9.0 the most stable version or the worst version released since 3.0? Whatever your interpretation in this question of us, we are still using it and in fact our system might be integrated with MS Navision come 2006. Well, my experience is that VFP9 runs and runs and runs 24 hours a day 7 days a week without causing any problems whatsoever. My webshop has run VFP9 for more than one year now, non stop. I call stat stable, what do you call it?

Some of our clients too because ours' is a Hospital System, with the exception of the new REPORT Engine ofcourse. Out of nearly 30 hospitals, there are only two that uses the VFP90 version because of those issues.

>Honestly, I seriously doubt that you have used VFP9 very much, which is why I questioned your skills. I realize that the word "skills" may have been a wrong word in this case, lack of experience (with VFP9) would better describe what I really ment.

I use VFP9.0 since day 1 of its availability and we are one of the few in our area who were given the first few DVDs because we are MS ISV and MS Business Partner here. In fact, if you noticed in my original thread, MS wants to partner with us to INTEGRATE Navision Business Software with our system regardless if it is done in .NET or VFP. And we were advised that MS-Asia Pacific will help market our system with the NAVISION software in ASIA-PACIFICwide. We are only 13 points shy short to become Gold Partner FYI which speaks of our experience and viability as software development company at least in our area.

The list in SP1 and the incoming SPs and SEDNAs are plain and simple facts that there must be a problem with the VFP9.0 released version. I could still remember when MS have no plans of releasing SP in VFP8.0 not until some folks asked for it. With 9.0, right after the release, SP1 is announced together with SEDNA, then right after SP1 is released, SP2 is announced which I interpreted it as 'there must be something wrong with the 9.0 released'. And there is no need for somebody to be SKILLFUL enough or EXPERIENCED enough to understand these facts. And I would say, SKILLS or EXPERIENCE has nothing to do about the issues.

>
>>Tore,
>>
>>Thanks for being so kind to me!
>>
>>>So, have you had a bad day, and want to throw the bad feeling on us?
>>>
>>>First of all, it has never been a secret that the VFP9 report engine is aimed at laser printers and inkjet printers, if you still need to print to dot matrix printers, you must use Report behavior 80.
>>
>>Maybe I missed the part in VFP Manual that explains that VFP9 is designed for lasertjets. Having said that, why is it that we encounter the same problem in HP laserjets inconsistently? MS should clarify and warn us that VFP 9.0 report improvements (as we proudly claim) then that it's not good for dot matrix printers. Can they do that? Absolutely NO, because it could give us knowledge that the REPORT ENGINE changed in architecture is somehow technically problematic because other REPORT tools i.e. Crystals don't have similar problems. And perhaps no one will upgrade to 9.0 immediately.
>>
>>>By the way, we dumped our last dot matrix printer some ten years ago, this is 2005, man! HP Laserjets: Skip the HP drivers, and use the native Microsoft drivers, that has been common knowledge for most of us.
>>
>>Sorry, but some of our clients don't have the luxury to dump dot matrix printers. It's economic problem, not software problem.
>>
>>>
>>>Secondly, with so many features, you think 200 (I doubt that number, but OK) is a high number? How many do you think still exists in comparable software? And how many bugs are "serious"? Get real, man! This depends on your programming skills and which features you use, I have seen none, zero, zilch, bugs which has made any problems for me at all with VFP9.
>>>
>>>As to the announcement of a SP2, I think that's a good sign, this means that VFP9 will have even more bugs fixed. I'd rather have a VFP9 with a few minor bugs, than a 'real soon now' promise ala IE7, Longhorn and other programs which have been in the making for years.
>>
>>Man! I am challenging the claim of MS that VFP 9.0 is the most stable version since 3.0. VFP 8.0 I guess was the most stable compare to 9.0 because of the glaring bugs fixed in SP1 and the upcoming SP2 and Sedna. Those are facts coming from MS themselves not from me.
>>
>>The program that we run the first time in 9.0 have some tweaks first to run smoothly but runs well in 8.0. That's understandable but with the SP1 list of bugs that were fixed, it shows and proves us Why?
>>
>>Another thing that I want to clarify is that I never said there is a software without bugs because there is no such thing PERIOD! I will not prove my worth as with regards to my technical know-how in VFP because that's a 'NO CLASS' and IMMATURE act and I will not stoop down to that level. Now for those of you who trying project yourselves better than your peers, watchout coz 'what sow is what you reap' and it might be boomerang to you.
>>
>>We use VFP well side-by-side with C#.Net because the first is I think is still far better when it comes to Data manipulation.
>>
>>The burden of proof is now in Microsoft to prove that about claim that VFP 9.0. is really the most stable released version since 3.0. because facts shows it isn't. You may argue with me but that's my take and I am now giving you the table to prove me wrong.
>>
>>>>The claim of MS that VFP 9.0 is the most stable release they have so far is now in question to me. Why? SP1 has some 200 bugs fixed and they're coming up with SP2 aside from SEDNA which I guess will also have lots of fixes included. Worst, many of the reported bugs that were fixed are obvious and basic bugs which in the first place shouldn't be passing through first level of debugging. Reading the list of fixes of SP1, we have one bug that is so important to us that is not yet fixed: can't recognized legal size paper for some printer i.e. EPSON LX 300+, some HP Laserjets... We are then forced to set report behaviour to 80 which is awkward.
>>>>
>>>>Is VFP 9.0 the most stable version or the worst version released since 3.0? Whatever your interpretation in this question of us, we are still using it and in fact our system might be integrated with MS Navision come 2006.