Not true. I've run the tests on huge tables and the performance difference for RV, ADO, CA, and SPT is negligible. In the end, CA uses either ADO or ODBC (which is what SPT and RV use) for anything except inserting large amounts of data.

>Personally I'd toss remote views. If you are going to move to a SQL database, use the SQL database. Remote views (and the DBC in general) are more of a crutch than a tool. The DBC just adds another layer of files that can be corrupted. Remote views have performance tradeoffs if you have more than a small database.
>
>CursorAdapters IMO are one of the best features of VFP. They take care of a lot of overhead for you while still working against the real database. They also prepare you for the SQLDataAdapter that is a very common .NET component. Wrap the cursoradapter in a class that takes care of making and closing connections as needed and handling errors and you're good to go.
>
>SPT works great too, and can have the best performance. They just require more legwork for the developer when doing updates.