>>Hey Terry,
>>Since you poked my name in there I'd like to add few cents.
>>Hope you didn't mean me saying "con artists calling themselves VFP consultants". I think grids are more valuable than a treeview. My grid mentality never caused a market loss but gain. Strange observation on our part. If TV is the right tool then .Net should be praised more as .Net TV class is much much better than the ocx one.
>>Cetin
>
>The con-artists I was referring to were the card carrying VFP consultants that use to prey on late eighties and early nineties project "buyers" in America. It continued - so it seemed - right up till almost 2000.
>
>The "artists" were consultants who know enough about VFP to build a table and show a browse window. They would charge 10's of thousands of dollars to deliver a "browse" window solution. I got a lot of work cleaning up after these guys. I listened to the "users" plain. Some actually thought (or wanted to belive) that that the reason they got burned was not because of the consultant - but because that was all VFP could do - browse windows.
>
>We also lost in the GUI "appeal" arena because VB and Delphi developers did not have the ease of the grid - they had to use OCX. As a "user" I think ListViews are a better (sexier) browse service than grids.
>
>I have done grid projects - some were pretty good - but list views are more appealing - I just never though snap-to sliders (on grids) were something I should force on my users when LV had a real time slide - and looks better.
>
>I am not saying swap trees for any thing that moves on th form. I am saying pageframes fille with pages of grids reminds mor of a multi-tabbed spread sheet than a high end data management solution. I am saying look at OCX and work with controls that don't have binding - I am saying avoid the easy stuff.
>
>I am also suggestion that rather than be a "tool" expert - learn how to address "noded" containers (TV is only one) almost all the OCX are node engines. XML DOM is a node engine.
>
>Look at XML to Cursor - sure it is easy to get proficient with that - but it may be better from a career point of view to understand DOM (another node engine) and how to render nodes and X-Path - like all the development tools require.

Terry,
I work with treeviews, listviews and other ocx stuff too but still I don't see any control that can be used in place of grids for many places. It might be so yesterday but no control were invented as powerfull as it is since then (like SR-71 plane which is from 70's and still is the speed king). ie: I tried to make this with another control like TV but couldn't:

Consider a log of attendance at school. Mainly a student has signin and out records. Each 'session' is associated with a tutor, category and class. I want to edit this log and to do it I want to see results like this:
Student, Tutor, Category, Class, (intime, outtime)
or:
Category,Class, Tutor, Student
or any similar combination. How would this fit to a TV or LV or anything other than a grid? With a grid I can sort,filter any combination and ultimately 'seek' to particular records I want. If it were just Category/Subcategory still a TV isn't suitable because it's slow on loading plus a user would go nuts scrolling to access 100th subnode of a category node (TV has no type to go feature when there can be multiple nodes starting or having same node text - consider this on left or right panel of windows explorer, it simply sucks with only 500 or so directories/files).

Actually in our application there are forms which used non-grid approaches (TV,LV,listbox,combo etc) and our customers are pushing us hard to make them grid based navigators also. They see it as an upgrade to the particular forms rather than going back to yesterday (and if yesterday is better then there is nothing wrong to be so yesterday).

PS: Somewhere along your posts I saw "You can't do this with grid" I think. Maybe not yours. I can't think of something that I can't do with grids (except cooking-well I can't do it anyways:).
Cetin