Stephane,
Certainly no insult intended. But yes I expressed my thoughts poorly.
What I was on about is that we are all playing in the same sandbox and I do not want my application being clobbered by someone else who short cut the recommended procedures. We certainly all have had a perfectly good application change its behaviour because of DLL hell. Roll on .NET and the ability to work out of ones own directory structure instead of the other straight jacket that we have been working with.
Regards and thanks for ignoring my poorly expressed thoughts.

>Hi Andrew,
>
>If Windows Installer is so great tell me why with MS installation pattern in .NET you can completly avoid it in .NET by supporting XCopy type of installations?
>
>I have had my share of problem with MSI, i am using it as less as possible and we are using XCopy deployment for all client upgrades, it has been working great for years for us and our clients never complaint.
>
>But i guess this is a personnal choice, we figured that we prefer using our ressources for coding our applications, not for unneccessary complex setup programs.
>
>BTW i'm ignoring the insult on your reply since i'm sure it wasn't personal.
>
>Stephane
>
>>Stephane,
>>I think you should read more on the Windows Installer Technology. You may find that the Operating System will defeat your efforts, and I think that is why we are using updated methods of Setup - from W2K onward life has changed in the Install department. At the very least you may be creating unstable conditions on the client machines - and VFP might end up getting the bad name instead of the rogue who ignored the correct way of updating your client machines.
>>Set Rant OFF
>>HTH
>>Regards