>I think its only logical that MS Would go to a SQL Server 7.0 Desktop
>Edition. You would only have to program all the Development Languages
>for one data source, and the Desktop Edition (Or the SQL Server Edition)
>Would take care of the Syncing of the two.
>
>Also, What No one has really mentioned is the fact that MS Does not
>make any money off of the Access and Foxpro programs that
>we distribute, using their Natave Databases. They WOULD make
>money when we are required to install SQL Server Desktop
>edition with out Distributed Apps like Oracle and SQL Anywhere does..
>This makes it a no-brainer for Microsoft...

Well, well, you do have a point here. When M$ bought Fox, it came bundled with a "runtime is royalty free and freely distributable with the app" policy deep in its kernel. The runtime always included the native data engine, and M$ didn't dare change that; in fact, the runtimes for all other things (Jet, VB etc) were also freely distributable, AFAIK.

Well, some years ago even phone support was free, right? What are the monopolies for, if you can't use them to make money on things that would otherwise be free?