No, I understand what you're saying, but I think it's more of a disadvantage than an advantage. I just don't see why you think it's such a great idea.

One other thing...you have to keep SQL statements to the lowest common denominator. That means you also can't take advantage of many features in the backend server.

>I just don't get it??
>
>From what I see there is no simple way to switch all of your local views to remote views without creating another set of views. There is not some simple 3 line property change like what I can do to switch connection strings to do this - your stuck creating another set of views...thus doubling the workload anytime you make structure changes.
>
>>Oh my, no. Tables/database, etc should be opened in one location. Again, your way will have slower data access and limits you to VFP 6 and earlier features. It also takes more memory.
>
>What do you mean by "one location" ??
>And yes I realize that using the remote views limits me to VFP6 features - but that's not been a problem for me and by doing so I've made switching backends seamless. The slower data access is so miniscule (if there actually is any) that's it not even noticeable to the user. As for the memory - well if the views are designed properly it's not that much memory and PC's these days come with more than enough memory to handle these things without having to worry about it. And how does a remote view use more memory than a local view anyway?
>Sorry to keep pestering you but I really want to understand all this :)