>I know all about the Fox technology found in VB, but have you stopped to consider what MS has implemented into VFP? It's a two way street...
>
>Access had a workable database container with default values, picture masks, R/I, and triggers long before VFP 3.0 was released. The VFP 5.0 debugger is based upon VC++ 5.0's.
>
>So, you consider VFP better at SQL back-ends than the other MS tools. I guess the rest of the world is misled... Even if you're right and without bias, the best technology does not always win, i.e. Apple's Mac, Sony's BETA, etc. Funny thing is, unlike these other technologies, Fox is cheaper than its competitors.
>
>Regards,
>Jack
>
>
I disagree with you about Access having a "workable" database container. In my opinion it's "barely workable". It works fine if you have very small datasets. The database container is somewhat functional, but in my experience, the Jet engine is very unstable - especially when implementing triggers & R/I.

Don't you think that it's a good thing that MS is implementing technology from other products into VFP? It would be great if all of the MS language tools incorporated the best tools from each product (i.e. debugger, class browser, etc.) and they all ended up with the same set of tools. I do alot of development using VFP, VB, Access, ASP (using VBScript and JavaScript). No matter which tool I'm using, I'm always wishing that some thing or other from one of the other tools was available. I like the way MS is making the objects from the various tools compatible with each other. This way I can use the best tool for each part of a product and then combine them together into a great solution.