>>
>>And just to stir things up a bit more, although you didn't ask, if you're looking at desktop apps then also consider WPF instead of WinForms :-}
>>
>
>You just did {g}. Seriously though, why do you think WPF is better than Winform? I admit that I know almost nothing about WinForms and even less about WPF. But I need to make a decision (recommendation) to a VFP customer on to what are we going to convert the VFP application. My understanding is that WinForms is the closest to VFP in terms of look and feel. WPF (from a little description I read) I believe is a graphical subsystem and I thought more suitable for graphical business applications rather than data entry type. Again, I am just guessing from the little I have heard/read about it. But I would love to hear your input on this since you have already working with WPF. And I thank you in advance for sharing.

WinForms is certainly closer to VFP than is WPF and I'd accept that if someone is already familiar with WinForms and writing a standard 'business' type app then there's not much reason to switch to WPF.

From a UI point of view the beauty of WPF (to me) is that you can *completely* replace the appearance of any control - from a button to a grid, a combobox or listbox but usually that's overkill - you can change a lot without redefining the it completely. For instance it's pretty straightforward to completely 're-skin' an application using styles (bit like CSS in web pages)

The way controls are automatically sized/rearranged also makes it much easier to implement multi-language versions where that is a requirement.

But there's a *lot* more to WPF than just the UI. For example:
* The use of Routed events (event tunnelling and bubbling)
* The Command system.
* Dependency properties (which take a bit of getting used to). I read somewhere that the humble button has pushing a hundred properties (I guess the WinForms equvalent has somewhat less) but in WPF less than a dozen are true properties - the rest are dependency properties and most of these will have no memory requirement unless actually used.
* The Databinding - which is a lot more flexible that the WinForms implementation.

Back on the UI front Transformations (allowing scaling, rotation, and more) are built in, as is pretty full support for sound, video and 3-D graphics (the graphics sub-sytem bypasses GDI+ completely and intelligently makes use of available graphics card capabilities)

All of that said to use WPF fully requires a *big* change of mindset and a steep learning curve......

Anyway - I love it and would hate going back to WinForms, HTH
Viv