>Clearly the problem is that VFP is a better development environment than VB, Access, etc. However, the only way Microsoft knows to continue to make money is by touting the VB/SQL Server or Access/SQL Server solution. Nevermind that you can create thousands of solutions in VFP for small to medium sized workgroups that will never need SQL Server and will outperform VB and Access exponentially, Microsoft is in business to make money, and it will continue to do so. Do you think that they're going to tell all of the people that they've conned into using VB as a database program that there's a much better product to use right in Visual Studio? Of course they won't.
>
>I guess what gets me the most is the ignorance of those that blindly follow whatever Microsoft says without question and never ever bother to look at VFP. Clearly this ignorance is costing them and their clients both time and money.

Sure, all the major corporations that decide on a C/S solution do so blindly. And there's a government conspiracy to cover it up...

VFP is a weak solution for WAN's. Companies want ENTERPRISE level data more and more, not LAN departmental data. Also, in major corporations, security and data integrity are of the up-most importance. When a client workstation power failure could possibly corrupt an index during production, i.e. Fox, you have a problem. And if a server fails, will Fox pick up AUTOMATICALLY with a transaction as SQL Server will on a reboot? Not from what I have read...

Even small to medium sized companies can not afford to have the best system in place to protect their data. In the long run, SQL Server will provide all the database needs of MS products. If it's Gates vision, then you, as a small part of MS overall customer base, have no choice...