>>>
>>>Herman,
>>>
>>>I think you understood me, but just to be clear, I used the window class name only as an example. For some applications, a known value of the main window class name would do the trick, for others, you'd need some other identifying characteristic, e.g. a pattern match on the window title. In general, I'm saying that with the help of such meta-information about specific applications or categories of applications to be launched, it may (in most cases) be possible to get a handle on the target without too much trickery. Another thing would be to know the preferred way of launching each app, when there are multiple alternatives, e.g. knowing when CreateObject/GetObject is available. If the target app is VFP-based, and if one has control over its design, this should be the best possible scenario.
>>>
>>>Mike
>>
>>
>>Mike,
>>
>>If I understand you correctly. Do you mean that we already have all (most) of the information before hand ? And if the apps has the control, does it mean that we have a limitation ?
>>Please correct me if I'm wrong
>
>Herman,
>
>Well, now I'm not sure exactly what you are asking, so I'll just try to clarify what I meant. Yes, I'm saying that we have some additional information about the application before we launch it, but not necessarily information that can be obtained in a generic, automated way. That why I called this a compromise, or if you wish, a limitation. We could be somewhat heuristic about it, using metadata-driven "intelligence" to make a reasonable guess as to the category of application to be launched. But in general, one would need to allow for a way of configuring the launcher for the known characteristics of any particular application, and for launching it in a particular way. Using a tool like Spy++, for example, one could determine how to detect a specific job and configure the launcher accordingly. So yes, I'm making some big assumptions about the nature of this facility and its inherent limitations. As it happens, I'm about to make a public beta release of such a product.
>
>Mike

Hmm..seems like I mis-understood your real point. I am sorry cause my english is not good :(
That's why I always look for a simple thread. So even I could say that I'm agree with you, I don't want to make anymore comment. I'm afraid that I can make another mistake :)

Anyway, it's good to hear that you are going to make a tools for this, aren't you ? I hope you will put it in the download section once you finish the program. Because many times I could understand clearly from looking into the code/apps. So good luck and happy coding! :-)

Regards