John,

responses interspersed. . .
>Hi Jim ---
>
>Are you going to tell me, seriously, that you can get a client to buy into an enterprise solution based on DBFs???? Especially heterogenous n-tier client/server solutions. I'm not talking a podunk Mom and Pop application, I'm talking about real line-of-business applications.
>
Yes, I am! I've seen it done! Extremely well, too. And may I mention Eurotunne?

l>VFP is really great at *manipulating* large data sets but DBFs don't cut it at the back-end. Lack of security, lack of (enough) data integrity. Virtual DBFs, as in remote views, are fine.
>
>A key point you made about DBFs: It could be extended with not much more work...OK, fine. At that point what I have posted becomes closed to "crap". But until then, the only way to find a role for VFP large-scale without looking like an idiot is to work with SQL Server or Oracle or DB2 Universal as the back-end database.
>
And what is holding YOU back from pushing for these modest improvements in DBFs and VFP??? Fear for VFP's future? Fear that C/S is the way to go and you don't want to be left behind? Anxiety to be "in the club"?? What's holding you back, John???

---- Snip

Cheers,

Jim N