Kevin,

You're right on here. Crystal is overkill for many, but an absolute necessity for others...it really depends on your needs.

For those reading this thread, here is a list of things I condsider to be the biggest advantages of Crystal over VFP 8.0. We'll have to wait until VFP 9.0 beta in June to see what gets removed from this list:

- drill down
- graphing
- subreports
- multiple detail, header, and footer bands
- automatic crosstab
- export to multiple formats (PDF, HTML, Word, etc)
- report preview (for example, zoom to 400%)


>< Crystal is an over kill. We don't need the hastle (and cost) of the crystal runtimes and odbc. We just need a clean, flexible reporting tool that allows us to decide what the end user can see and change. It may be on it's way and we're looking forward to it. <
>
>Who is 'we'? These statements are misinformed.
>
>- Depending on the type of solution being provided, Crystal runtimes are royalty free. And ODBC is only one method of using CRW. (I've used CRW since 1997, and never needed to use ODBC).
>
>- If you think Crystal is 'overkill', fine, that's a reflection of the type of reporting you've been asked to do (not a value judgement, just an observation). Many clients/users have reporting requirements that are sufficiently handled by VFP's RW.
>
>However, particularly in the highly competitive 'vertical market' paradigm, more reporting/graphing functionality is sometimes required. I'd be happy to list those in detail, if anyone is interested.
>
>- I'm aware of the major changes to the RW in Europa. I'm sure that those who are not using another reporting tool will be delighted with the VFP9 RW, as well they should. Multiple detail bands and run-time access will be great additions.
>
>I'm equally confident that few who use another reporting tool will have a strong interest in abandoning it in favor of Europa's RW functionality. Those who speculate otherwise are probably not aware of how much capability exists in Crystal. As David correctly pointed out, CRW is far ahead of VFP's Report Writer, and that is not likely to change.
>
>- David is dead-on right, in the next 12-18 months we're going to have a number of great new tools (VFP9, Yukon, Whidbey, Reporting Services) and an increase in books/articles/etc. to show how we can use these tools to provide more and more functionality for our users. Certainly VFP9 will be a part of that. I'm a long-time subscriber to FoxTalk, and am pleased to hear the news that it will continue.
>
>- My original point was to question the decision to add functionality to the report writer, given that it received limited attention for 7 years and far better choices exist. I think this concept of 'everything in one box' is a strategy that ultimately limits the product instead of expanding it. For instance, I'd love to see MS enhance the VFP architecture for more seamless integration with CRW (similar to what is found in VB).
>
>- Please don't misinterpret my comments as trying to diminish the positive news. VFP will certainly remain a force on the map for a good while, and I applaud Ken's efforts.
>
>But it's important to remember that none of this changes what options are out there to supplement VFP, what the job market looks like, direction in I.T. mandates, etc.
>
>There are realities out there, and one of them is that a growing # of projects/jobs require skills in tools beyond VFP. Those who accept this as fact and plan for the future accordingly are likely to be better off.
>
>Kevin