Missingling's original post is all that's necessary, except that he forgot to mention that you need to set the form's TimerInterval property.
Spudmizer is mistaken about faster computers counting to 1000 faster. Well, actually that's true, but setting the TimerInterval to 1000 is not the same as having the computer count to 1000. Whenever the form's TimerInterval is non-zero, the computer is counting anyway, one tick per millisecond. Setting the timer higher just means that the Timer event procedure will execute less often/fewer times.
However, while setting the TimerInterval lower actually does use more CPU power, the waste is negligible for all practical purposes. I suggest using 500 (1/2 second), to avoid the situation where the CPU clock changes a few microseconds after a timer tick occurs, with the result that the form is almost a full second late updating its display. With a setting of 500, the form will be less than 1/2 second late.
Requerying the form isn't necessary with Missingling's method.
Rick Sprague
Want the best answers? See faq181-2886
To write a program from scratch, first create the universe. - Paraphrased from Albert Einstein