--- much snipped
>
>You seem to be on a vendetta to have VFP do what you did in FPD, which it can do now, so I'm having trouble understanding why you seem to be constantly in attack mode against others who advocate using SQL server for what VFP can't do. There are lots of complaints and confusion over MS database tools because for many jobs there isn't a clear distinction between when VFP, Jetor SQL Server should be the data store. You seem like you won't rest until the answer is always all VFP, which is simply never going to happen with VFP or any other product.
---- end snip

Hi Mike,

Perhaps it looks like a vendetta, and maybe even that's what it is!
But I am having a really really hard time UNDERSTANDING how this "vision" is good for me or good for VFP.

KISS (keep it simple, stupid) is a principle which I still believe in. I happen to beileve that it is even MORE important as more and more applications are delivered which are "production" in nature - the company DEPENDS on it to run its business.

I have a very simple setup here (2 systems) and I cannot get proper results from an all MS product (WORD 97) running on a all MS (WIN95) OS with only a video card and printer driver being sourced elsewhere and *no* fancy extensions in my system. Word comes close, but don't work right in a certain circumstance (and there is no evident way around it).
Now MS would have me deliver production apps using SQL Server and ADO and assorted other what-nots and wherefores across many (possibly hundreds) of workstations? It looks to me like its hard enough to get a all VFP app running properly in today's environment, not to add the complexity of these additional things.

THAT is at the root of my "vendetta" - I simply do not believe that this "vision" is a workable thing in the longer run and I am exposing the "oddities" (as I perceive them) wherever I can.

It is entirely worth noting that IBM had to back off from a similar scheme in their mainframe arena where all he code was proprietary! And where controls are very much tighter than they are in the PC arena! And IBM's products were mainly all components working towards the same objectives, not a host of vastly different products trying to cooperate.

So I believe very strongly that this "vision" will burn us badly in the end. I believe that my fears are well-founded. I equally believe that most who purport to support the "vision" do so primarily on faith and very little more. Faith which, though highly commendable, is misplaced in my humble opinion.

Regards,

Jim N