Hello Rod,

>According to ken a majority of VFP developers use SQL (or some equivalent) >as a back end database. So this would be a good comparison.

I have talked to Ken on this issue also, and hope he can chime in on this. My understanding is that more that half of the VFP users have use SQL Server with VFP, so have I. However I do not have a single app in comercial use using that configuration, my customers didn't want it.

We just started a new users group in Philly, most of the attendants had in excess of 10 years VFP real life experience. Only a handful had more that cursory experience with SQL server. The speaker who gave the last session said that the prestigeous company he works at had trouble finding anyone with solid VFP/SQL experience. This was about a year ago.

The real difference is that .NET/SQL is a more POPULAR combo because MS wants it that way, and .NET needs the support of external databases to function, thus more people will do that.

>.NET Does not have a local engine like fox so we would need to end the >discussion right there if that is the comparison. I don't feel we need to >discuss the benefits/costs of using DBF's vs SQL in >this discussion. It is >a technology discussion. Thoughts ?

Again, misses the mark, but I agree that if you wanted to compare on a local data engine it would end the discussion (who would that winner be??) But that would be like saying VFP would loose in a CLR comparison, since VFP doesn't have one, agreed not fair.

What should the comparison be??
Really a tough call, but I think it should be how productive an experienced programmer can be using the tool of their choice.

Bob



Bob