- Security

- Backups. If the .dbf is open when the backup runs, it won't get backed up. You can run an agent that knows how to deal with SQL Server and backup the data.

- Stability. SQL Server suffers far less data corruption than a dbf

>First of all, thanks to everybody for their responses.
>
>I had not been considering SQL Server (or SQL Server Express) mainly because, well, I did not know enough to consider it.. As it happens, to nobody's surprise, we are running SQL Server, but at this time I have read-only access.
>
>I have noted with interest the discussion and SQL Server Express, and am not at all concerned, for one thing, about the database size. This project is quite small, even by the standards here at Kong, where the entire VFP universe, all in free tables, probably does not at up to 2 Gig. I wouldn't be surprised if this project never gives to 50 Meg total.
>
>So, I could install SQL Server Express locally, create the project, and then eventually (after I've gotten full access) make it available to my client (uh, my employer) for them in SQL Server.
>
>Assuming I'm not interested in scalability or portability, why would I want to go this route?