>>Could someone elaborate on what "similarly" means in this context? I'm moving a VFP8 SP1 app to VFP9 SP2, and I have 2 reports that are exhibiting "creep" running against a dot matrix printer. On any given page, I am losing 3 lines of detail, and this is pushing the footer off into thin air. By increasing the footer height, I can get my content back but a 1-2 inch footer is a bit much. I assumed setting 80 would give me backwards compatibility. Was I wrong?
>
>"similarly" means "kind of the same, except it doesn't work right", as far as I can tell. In particular, dot matrix printers and VFP 9 do not seem to get along. VFP9's footer/detail vertical alignment is off, and while I can correct it on a laser printer by changing the height of the footer band, I just can't get their pre-printed forms to align or even sometimes fill out the whole page with some clients' printers.
>
>I'm thinking I'm going to wind up doing some kind of OLE/SetParent() tricks to get a VFP 8 "form" running in a VFP 9 parent Window.

Good to hear I'm not the only one ;-) Cathy and I worked off line on a sample of mine and she was able to reproduce it, along with a work around. Unfortunately, that work around seems printer/driver/environment specific. In the end, I went through all of my reports (not that many in this app) and increased the footer band to 1.25". Luckily, I had the luxury of wasting the space. This solved the vertical creep for us.