>I *can* do that today *IF* I use SQL-Server or some other such. I presume that >is what you are getting at??

Are you saying you can't provide a secure environment with a VFP back-end today? Your suggestion sounded very hardware intensive to me. Why would you have to wait for the future? This is all available now and has nothign to do with VFP.


>Well, I wonder why MS got into the Word and Excel business when AmiPro and >Lotus 1-2-3 already existed??? I could do what I needed with those, couldn't >I??? Same goes for lots of MS products, as well as lots of other people's >products. One major reason they do it is that they believe they have a better >idea and can make a buck at it!
>Why does Ford have Ford and Mercury??? Why does GM continue with at least 4 >lines of cars???

I am not sure I understand your analogy here<s>....

>I don't WANT to have a complex system dependent on several products of high >complexity to always work well together. I don't WANT to sell my clients SQL->Server as well as VFP solutions. I don't want to have to LEARN another complex >product, or to pay the bucks to a consultant who knows it just to be able to >do basic things that VFP could be made to do. I don't want the problems >involved in integrating multiple different releases of different products into >my base applications (it's bad enough already, not to add more to it!).
>I *do* want a simpler, more straight-forward, more reliable life.

Bascially, you want to build monotlithic applications consisting of 1 product. That's fine. Just be aware that this is counter to the direction of where development tools are going.