>>Who else?
>
>I was offered a long term contract to maintain that system a couple of weeks ago.
>
>I almost took it, but the more I thought about trying to keep a major, heavily overloaded, FPW26 app running and migrating to VFP (but not SQL - still DBFs) the more it scared me. I finally turned them down. The VFP migration is *supposed* to be a temporary patch while they come up with a new system. The VFP migration is, in their terms, a "minimalist" approach which says to me they are just going to run 2.6 code in VFP.
>
>If they at least migrated to SQL data storage I'd have probably taken the contract because at least the data would be stable..
>
>Been there. Done that. Not again...

You should hv offer them to convert to MSSQL as backend and VFP front
but with safety belt called sufficient number of XP-CD's purchased <vbg>
Provided that there was no fatal EOL announcement, this would hv been the best possible solution for them.

BTW the other day I ordered 5 new PC's (HP) firmly insisting on XP. Apparently MS/HP are being *nice* ; You get to buy XP with option to upgrade to Vista for free. It is not like I am going to excerise that option, but I was thrilled with noble act ...
(<vbg>)*3