>But I hardly believe in such a fact : MS isn't that fool to permit something you can do with MS C++...
>BASIC is always an interpreted language, needing a huge runtime, and OCX's to improve windows and its abilities.

To start a possible argument here, I think that's exactly why Microsoft IS the fool for just those reasons you stated. VB's attraction is its ability to create programs quickly, but its bloat is not needed. Look at Delphi - it offers true OOP with little bloat (ie no required run-times), plus Delphi is almost as easy to learn. I think MS is losing customers because of this. And even if VB did become as efficient as VC++ it wouldn't compete with VC++ due to VC++'s learning curve. And MS is making strides to make VB more efficient, with its Compile to Native Code option and such. And you don't NEED the OCX's for a VB application - you can use all APIs. It'd be a pain, but it's possible.

Best,

jody