Jack,

Did you know that ADO is totally built on VFP cursor technology? Fox not only is a much better product for LAN apps it is the KING of data manipulation. Have you ever built a data warehouse with SQL Server? Forget it, I don't care what machine your running SQL Server on. SQL Server is made for transaction processing - adding, deleting or updating a row at a time. It can't keep up with complex SQL Statements being fired at it. This is where VFP's OLE Automation comes in. Any situation requiring tons of reporting on SQL Server data is ideal for VFP OLE Servers. All reports can be grouped into data subsets. Each report does different manipulations (grouping, sorting, summing, string concatenating, etc.) on the same subset. We use VFP OLE Servers to bring data subsets to a local VFP table with a simple SQL select against SQL Server. Then use any number of VFP OLE Servers to hit the VPF subset table doing all the complex SQL selects and pumping out VFP reports, VFP tables or ADO recordsets. Once you unload the complex SQL selects from SQL Server and let VFP do all the data manipulation you have a serious scalable solution. Now instead of needing multiple replicated SQL Servers to keep up with the hits you just add another $4000 NT Workstation and run more OLE Servers.

Another area VFP is great for is data scrubbing - bring together data from many different systems into a common data structure. All the data manipulation is done by VFP then VFP kicks out a common ASCI text table which is sucked up by SQL Server's BCP. Oh, SQL Server's BCP can be controlled by a VFP OLE Server which schedules and logs all bulk copy processes to a VFP table. And you thought VFP lacked direct links to SQL Server. VFP can completely control SQL Server.

As for your statement regarding a half-hearted attempt as far as the Internet. VFP is not the best front-end tool for many C/S, 3-tier or Internet solutions. But if you require serious data intensive processing in a 3-tier or Internet solution you want VFP as your middle tier. Designing an army of VFP OLE Servers to schedule and control data importing, data scrubbing, SQL Server bulk copies and various reporting avenues - from VFP tables accessed by a department VFP front-end to a HTML interface driven by VPF accessed worldwide on the Internet. VFP is the best tool for middle tier you just can't beat it. And this is ENTERPRISE level development and VFP makes it work.

Your statement that Fox still lacks the more direct links to SQL Server makes me wonder how much you have used VFP. Have you heard of remote views? VFP and SQL Server work great in a C/S situation where a fat client is acceptable or the client does a lot of data manipulation. Oh, ADO actually rectifies the lack of integration between VB and SQL Server, not VFP and SQL Server.

We are moving into a component world. Each tool has a specific purpose, a strong point - VB is thin, robust front-end and VFP is data manipulation. If M$ to include the Fox engine in VB it would be moving away from the component world concept.

As far as M$'s lack of acknowledgement of VFP. Companies make mistakes. IBM's was not seeing the future of the PC; Apple’s was not getting market share by cloning. The way things are going for Mr. Bill if the government breaks up M$. M$ may sell VFP to another company. And maybe, just maybe that will be the turning point of M$'s control in the development tool race.

Billy D.
Black Diamond Software, Inc.
Building Better Information Environments

>>--- SNIP
>>>
>>>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...
>>--- end SNIP
>>
>>Jack,
>>
>>First, I do feel that many corps decide rather blindly on a C/S "solution" - it's the 'solution du jour'. But I think it's a conspiracy by the vendors generally (not the government) to make it sound like much much more than it really is.
>>
>>As for your "If it Gate's vision, then you, as a small part of. . ." you have forgotten (apparently) that the CUSTOMER IS KING. We, the VFP community generally, are at a double disadvantage because not only does your attitude seem to be the prevalent one, but also we are all living in mortal fear that MS will terminate VFP tomorrow if we are mis-compliant in ANY way shape or form!
>>So we all bow to "the vision" and we all thank MS' VFP team profusely for shreds of progress and we all hail Mr. Green for his unending "battle" for regocnition of VFP within MS.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Jim N
>
>When the product manager has to raise awareness of the product within MS itself, then I think there is definitely a problem. Craig Berntson points to Mr. Green's valiant efforts, yet I think that Mr. Green should focus more attention on improving the product as opposed to marketing it. But isn't that the root of the problem?
>
>Fox should continue to do what it does best, i.e. LAN apps. However, the Fox team has to keep it competitive in the area of C/S and Web development. It seems like a half-hearted attempt as far as the Internet when the VFP forms only run under IE 4.01; doesn't do much to push VFP for e-commerce, eh? And when it comes to C/S, it seems that Fox still lacks the more direct links to SQL Server that VB and VC++ offer, but I suppose ADO should rectify that...
>
>If MS was truly committed to Fox, why didn't the company do more to integrate the Fox engine with the other tools. Yes, certain aspects of it have been implemented, but why not the whole of it since the beginning? VB could have been kept a true general purpose programming language, and Fox pushed as the data development tool. But MS has not done this, and the majority of the customer base has evidently never requested it.
>
>So, MS has some sort of vision. The majority of its customer base has bought into it. And I doubt that there's much that any of us can do to stop it. Would you consider boycotting VFP 6.0 as a protest against the delivery of a less than desirable upgrade?
>
>Regards,
>Jack