Absolutely. That's what I said originally. If it's abug, it's ok to work around it, if it's by design, it's not ok. Nothing to do with hacking the software code. Now, let's think again about that 2 gig file size limit.... ;)

>>In fact, I agree with you about what their intentions probably were, but I still find the use of the words 'work around' a trifle odd. I have never heard anyone use those words in connection with the idea of hacking the language code itself. Since the MS EULA is aimed at developers, it kind of sticks in my craw that they've apparently co-opted words we all commonly use to mean 'finding an alternative (read cumbersome) way of doing something that should have been simple' and bent them to mean something none of us can really understand.
>>
>>As far as the 2 gig limitation, I think it just points up that the lawyers seem to be working in a vacuum when they come up with this junk. If they talked to the developers before publishing such nonsense, maybe we'd get wordings that make sense to us.
>
>Just keep in mind this means "working around" the limits that were intentionally designed into VFP. This certainly does not include "working around" bugs or know problems/issues that were not intentional to the original design.