>Could you explain to me why it is better to spend the effort to design an additional screen to "preview" report data, when if the normal report preview indeed worked better, the work would already be done? I mean, Windows was supposed to be WYSIWYG, but we all know it's fallen far short of that goal.

Fred,

If the preview did not exactly match the printed page then it would NOT be WYSIWYG at all. It would be a screen report versus a printed report. The only problem that I have with preview is that if the fonts are set to look good on paper they are generally too small to read on screen.

>I take it you mean that since the report preview is marginal, that this is the only feasable solution? Why wouldn't it be easier for Microsoft to just fix the report preview? IMO, display postcript would have solved our problems with previewing data a long time ago, instead of the miserable TT fonts.

Taht si not waht I mean. I mean that if my client makes a requirement that data bve reviewed on screen I will not use a report to do that. I will design a fomr that gives them that functionality. I will then design a report that lets the client print what they have selected in the form.

I do use PRINT PREVIEW, but only for what it exists for, that is previewing a printed report. Sometimes the user can read teh preview and be done, great. I am not upset if the printed report does not preview well. If the screen preview is required then I will create a form that ahndles that requirement because the report has many other weaknesses, like lack of UI for the user to interactively manipulate the data displayed etc., that preclude it from making an effective interactive display of data.

Again, I refer to the title of the thread, it is talking about commonly misused things, it is not any type of edict or comdenation of anything. it is trying to point out many of the places where features of VFP are commonly misused adn the report preview is one of them.