Since I commented earlier on this, I'd like to chime in. First and fore most, at this point I think Solarwind should have enough information to continue writing his program. As I stated earlier, this forum is probably not the best place to ask questions about C# since most embedded programmers wouldn't need to ever use C#. The proper place for this discussion would be on a C# board of some sort, or (and this is probably the best thing you can do) at your local .Net users group (the exist pretty much everywhere, are sponsored by Microsoft and actually have a good number of good programmers there). Note: I have seen multi-threading abused. There are times when it makes sense, and then there are times when it doesn't. Since you are the programmer, its your decision. I think everyone here is just telling you to be careful. Multi-threading (as I am sure you already know) opens up a very bad can of worms, which can easily cause you to get pretty beaten up. FWIW, I think your program SHOULDN'T have any problems displaying the number of records you are trying to display GIVEN you aren't using the built in data adapter technology (or whatever they call it). I have displayed this number of records fairly effectively in a ListView. At this point, I hear the rumblings of a famous OT flamewar starting, and I am running and ducking. I usually lurk on this board (because, again, usually the topics discussed are things I like to hear about, but know little to talk about), so I have seen my share of flamewars on this board. I don't think that there is anything good that can come of continuing this discussion. FWIW, I think that since you have to work on Microsoft platform, there is little good that can come in bashing the operating system that is putting food on your table. Also FWIW, I have known several people (and know several people) who have tried to (and some succeeded) in working at Microsoft. These people ARE good programmers! They have to go through 7 rounds of interviews and have to be the best of the best (the Microsoft interview processes is fairly tough). Even good programmers who get hired don't immediately get to work on core product. The problem (IMHO) isn't bad programmers, but in some cases bad business decisions. This isn't the right time or place to discuss this, but I think carrying legacy technology for 20 years, which has known security vulnerabilities was a bad BUSINESS decision (programmers don't get to make all the decisions at Microsoft). Windows 7 (which got rid of some of these legacy technologies) improved on this by leaps and bounds. Aleksei On 4 July 2011 10:11, Michael Watterson wrote: > On 04/07/2011 14:50, V G wrote: >> Microsoft hires poor programmers too. Compare the number of times >> Linux/BSD/QNX/whatever crashes compared to Windows. > depends on who configured it. If all Windows USERs as Expert as Linux > ones, then maybe nothing in it. >> Compare the number of viruses for each. Compare the number of security >> vulnerabilites. Compare the speed that they get patched. Compare the >> relative ease in taking each system down. > Linux is no more or less secure. Less attacked. The biggest problem is > ALL programmers use of C strings. >> Point made. >> >> Microsoft IS to blame. Microsoft has MANY software failures and design >> failures. >> > Bilgewater. > > You're doing it wrong. > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .