I thought my comment might draw some disagreement!

>>Surely then that disqualifies it as a real version change!?
>
>So, what you are saying is that to make a version change that you need to change things that are visual? I disagree. There were many bugs cleaned up, things that have existed since the Fox 2.x days, COM was improved and many other things.

I accept that to a point, certainly bugs need to be fixed, but there were many other things that people were begging for which would have improved the usability enormously. Consistency across Menus and forms, grids, lists and combo boxes, better print handling and many other things that I saw on this forum that I (speaking from limited awareness I admit) would have thought to be higher on the agenda that what was delivered.

>
>>I haven't upgraded because I can't see any visible reason why it would be worth it for me, being just a part-time programmer. I would hope that v7 would have some solid changes in basic usability features.
>
>The bug fixes alone are worth it. IMO, you are taking the same approach as people who still have Fox 2.x apps running. "The program is still working fine, so why upgrade it?" They are now having many problems from Y2K to fast processors. Do the upgrade. It is well worth it.

Well, that is my attitude to a point. We have a saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" If the program is working fine, then why upgrade. Of course it's not as simple as that - as your Y2K example shows - fortuneately all my Fox 2.6 apps are now either to be ditched or are running on VFP5, but there have been plenty of comments about a whole new raft of bugs in the upgrade!

>>VFP is great in many aspects, but it has some real quirks!
>
>IMO, every program has its quirks. VFP seems to have more, but that's due to it's heritage.

Sometimes I think it's because it doesn't take enough notice of its heritage - that is in the dbase, foxpro line and gives far move credence to its Visual Basic like enhancements. Still, I guess it's always a compromise!