>True, true. But if VFP played more by the "rules", we would lose some of our speed and flexibility IMHO. As I have said before, ever seen a VB app with several dozen forms and a lot of controls per form? What a PIG.

Sorry, Gonz, I don't necessarily buy this argument. If by "flexibility" you mean we'd lose PEMs, nope, don't think so. Both VB and VFP produce real "windows". Yet VFP has more PEMs than VB does. Why? The implementation of the underlying class.

As for speed, no evidence to indicate that we might lose any in a VFP implementation. We might, but there's nothing to say that the problem you saw wasn't tied to a reason other than VB's use of native controls. Further, we'd gain in a range that cover everything from ActiveX compatibility to doing away with some refresh problems. Plus, there's a possibility of VFP having a smaller footprint.