Yes, I agree with what you are saying, but my point was trying to be that WC's existence is another reason to stay with VFP over VB. Like VFP data is a such a reason. If I had to use SQL Server for every project I do it would definitely cut my productivity. If I only had ASP for web sites I couldn't take on the jobs I do. My son develops sites with ASP and won't consider VFP for social reasons, but I am constantly able to show him the advantages of WC and even he has to recognize them. Someone in the VB camp could create a WC-like product, but why not so far? Is it because components are not as easy to build, inheritance might be more important than JP's view. Why is Rick the one that came up with this? I think because of VFP. VB people would love to program web sites in VB instead of VBScript. <s>

Thanks for asking. I've really appreciated your input into UT since I started with it about 8 months ago.

>>but the point I was trying to make is: In VB there is no competition for Web Connect since they are using ASP with components and maybe MTS.
>
>I know, and what I was saying is: What ASP does for VB is what the WC.DLL does for VFP. And the WC.DLL is written in C++, therefore, IMO, VFP is not really apart of this picture.
>
>Is that right? I'm not trying be negatice towards WWWC at all, getting it is one of the best things I've ever done to myself (as far as computers go, ofcourse :-).