Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Westi on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
VFP3.0 and XP SP3
- Thread starter tlw6766
- Start date
Dan Freeman
Programmer
The actual problem is *too much* memory. When VFP3 was released, even 512mb of memory was just a pipe dream.
You can limit the amount of memory Windows uses with the /MAXMEM switch but it's probably better to get a later version of VFP. VFP3 was several versions outdated when XP was released.
The first VFP version with specific support for XP (themes) was 8, wasn't it?
Dan
You can limit the amount of memory Windows uses with the /MAXMEM switch but it's probably better to get a later version of VFP. VFP3 was several versions outdated when XP was released.
The first VFP version with specific support for XP (themes) was 8, wasn't it?
Dan
Version 3 was the very first release of VISUAL FoxPro a dozen or so years ago and has not been supported for many years. The first widely used (stable) version was 6.0 and even it is no longer supported. We are now up to 9.0 sp2. It would be nice if you were able to upgrade to a more recent version.
Isn't that buggy version ever?
I claim that VFP5 was the buggiest but that was the first version I used.
Some ones correct me that the buggiest version was VFP3 but I never used it
So, UPGRADE!!!!!!!!!
Only the new report engine itself worth the money you spent for the VFP9.
(Not to mention- CursorAdapter Class, BINDEVENTS(), EVENTHANDLER etc.)
Borislav Borissov
VFP9 SP2, SQL Server 2000/2005.
I claim that VFP5 was the buggiest but that was the first version I used.
Some ones correct me that the buggiest version was VFP3 but I never used it
So, UPGRADE!!!!!!!!!
Only the new report engine itself worth the money you spent for the VFP9.
(Not to mention- CursorAdapter Class, BINDEVENTS(), EVENTHANDLER etc.)
Borislav Borissov
VFP9 SP2, SQL Server 2000/2005.
Mike Lewis
Programmer
Hi Borislav,
I used to show a slide in my courses with a a count of the bugs in each version. I did that from 3.0 to 7.0. I got the figures by searching the Microsoft Knowledge Base.
You'll be surprised to hear that the version with the highest bug count was 6.0. But the reason was that it was also the longest-lived version. There were relatively short gaps between 3.0 and 5.0, and 5.0 and 6.0, but a long one between 6.0 and 7.0, so more time for the bugs to appear.
That said, the bugs in 3.0 and 5.0 were much more severe. And 3.0 was undoubtedly the worst version, not so much becuase of the number of bugs, but its overall lack of usability.
For example, do you remember in 3.0, you couldn't map your own classes to the fields in the data environment. So when you dragged, say, a logical field from the DE onto a form, you got the default checkbox, not your own base checkbox class. It was things like that that made a lot of people wary of using the product.
Mike
__________________________________
Mike Lewis (Edinburgh, Scotland)
My Visual FoxPro site: www.ml-consult.co.uk
I used to show a slide in my courses with a a count of the bugs in each version. I did that from 3.0 to 7.0. I got the figures by searching the Microsoft Knowledge Base.
You'll be surprised to hear that the version with the highest bug count was 6.0. But the reason was that it was also the longest-lived version. There were relatively short gaps between 3.0 and 5.0, and 5.0 and 6.0, but a long one between 6.0 and 7.0, so more time for the bugs to appear.
That said, the bugs in 3.0 and 5.0 were much more severe. And 3.0 was undoubtedly the worst version, not so much becuase of the number of bugs, but its overall lack of usability.
For example, do you remember in 3.0, you couldn't map your own classes to the fields in the data environment. So when you dragged, say, a logical field from the DE onto a form, you got the default checkbox, not your own base checkbox class. It was things like that that made a lot of people wary of using the product.
Mike
__________________________________
Mike Lewis (Edinburgh, Scotland)
My Visual FoxPro site: www.ml-consult.co.uk
Dan Freeman
Programmer
Actually, the thing that put people off with VFP3 was the horribly flaky Win32s thunking layer. VFP got blamed for all the things that were wrong with it.
VFP itself was actually pretty stable in a 32-bit OS, but who among us was running NT at that time?
VFP itself was actually pretty stable in a 32-bit OS, but who among us was running NT at that time?
- Status
