>>Unfortunately that show's your ignorance about technology. To compare VFP to Oracle, SQL Server, etc., is foolhardy. But just for my edification, what praytell would cause you to compare the two?
>>
>>>Thank you. I'm retired, so I'll keep on plunking away on VFP because I know it better than other languages and it is all I need for what I do. But on the other hand, I see a remarkable development tool being cast aside and that bothers me. I have always viewed VFP as a possible Oracle killer, but MS never went after Oracle which to this day baffles me.
>
>Well then, I suppose I'm ignorant. I had always kicked around the idea of VFP evolving into the world's best database platform and eventually a VFP version for larger systems that could take on Oracle head to head would be offered. Please, take the time to explain the difference, other than PC/mainframe, to me.

Grady,

If you're talking about Oracle Database vs. VFP Database, the first is far superior because it's a server based DB as compare to VFP's DB that is file based. VFP DB has a limit of 4GB per table while Oracle DB is in terabytes per database which can accommodate millions of records and will last for years even without removing records. VFP DB is vulnerable to corruption while Oracle DB isn't. It's better to state that SQL Server as a possible Oracle killer other than VFP but then again this premise is also very unlikely to happen.