No, that's not the ideas. And I thought it was quite clear... .NET should use DBCs and DBFs (through OLEDB) while VFP uses whatever pleases the coder.

Your "apples to apples" would be accommodated in that the data and results and development/testing time can be compared one-to-one to each other.

Looking to do "apples to apples" while tying one VFP arm behind its back ain't particularly straight, is it.

But all this no longer matters to me, since I saw that this is really your resurrection of an old grudge for some long-ago statement regarding .NET sucking when it comes to data.




>Jim (and all.....)
>
>>>Maybe, since .NET can do OLEDB, you should use DBCs and DBFs for the .NET >>part.
>>>Seems equitable to me since OLEDB is a 'native' access method for .NET.
>
>I see no real issue with this idea. We could use OLEDB as our mechanism for accessing data. So is the idea this... We use the OLEDB provide in Fox and .NET seeing how they both support OLEDB
>
>We just need some type of apples to apples comparison here. I will agree that NO other tool works like fox with its native data access. But I will also say that the majority of the world doesn't work like this. The majority of the world works in a set based environment. They bring down to the desktop a reasonable amount of data and work on that. Is this a valid assumption ?
>
>Thanks
>Rodman