Oh, ok, thanks for that clarification. Good to know that that bug was squashed.

>>Ummm...I think you were saying the FFC version fixes that NODEFAULT problem (and it does), but the FFC version was very unstable for me. Doing a direct subclass of the control has worked great and been completely stable . . .
>
>No. I've never used the FFC version. the NODEFAULT bug is fixed in VFP 9 as is the BeforeNavigate2() bug with POST data.
>
>These were specific things that were addressed based on bug reports. Some of these are actually bugs in IE and VFP has workarounds for them <g>, but either way VFP 9 makes dealing with the Web Browser control much more stable.
>
>+++ Rick ---
>
>
>>>>I've had mine in production for almost a year with no problems and it's used extensively. When you do it, just make sure you put the NODEFAULT in the Refresh method. I can't remember the exact issue right now, but I think they mention it in the comments in the FFC version of the control. On another subject, I am looking forward to the immenient release of VFP 9 to see if it solves that issue that makes the record pointer move on it's own. VFP 9 was supposed to RTM today, but I've seen no official word . . .
>>>
>>>It does fix the NODEFAULT problem as well as a few other event problems.
>>>
>>>Specifically BeforeNavigate2() now works properly with POST data which was a huge problem.
>>>
>>>+++ Rick ---
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Not yet. Just testing it still. It is working great but I wondered if anyone out there has experienced any problems with it before we deploy the app with it.
>>>>>>Did you subclass it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks for the information Russell. We are using the MSFT activex web browser control available when adding an ole object to a vfp form. So far in testing it works great and we have not experienced any problems.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Tracy