now I'm looking at open source alternatives just as critically before deciding what to do next

John, I'd be very interested in what you come up with as alternatives to VFP (forced out) and NET (forced in). I have not seen any discussion of this but is the MS position to move from VFP to NET and if that is not what you want to do to move down to Access?

>Isn't there a framework level mechanism that handles all this?
>
>I'm almost afraid to respond ;-)
>
>Both DataSets and Entities offer change tracking if you stay connected to the data.
>
>In April 2007, Entities lose change tracking if you disconnect from the data. Typed DataSets keep their change tracking which makes them suitable for passing between tiers for selective updates. I'm very much a student but I can already do a selective update using a typed DataSet.
>
>If you ask on UT whether NET people are using this change tracking, the most common answer is "no". If you ask why, the answer is that change tracking is generally unnecessary and that people are using a pessimistic locking technique.
>
>If I were planning a NET deployment, IMHO I'd be using change tracking all the time with a generic locking facility that can be activated as required. If it had to be done in April 2007 I guess I'd use Typed DataSets, but promised changes for Linq for SQL would make that preferable if people can wait.
>
>That's pretty much the conclusion I've reached after a fairly intensive investigation, so now I'm looking at open source alternatives just as critically before deciding what to do next.