>Linux Samba 3 and 4.x support both SMB 1 and 2. Therefore, if client side register changes are allowed and available then Fox should run.
>
>That said, I still see issues:
>
>1. Most window guys don't have a clue how to setup Samba - let alone Linux. It's not that they can't but it's doubtful they will even try.

Seems to me the days of "roll your own" Linux/Samba file servers are almost over. There are lots of NAS appliances you can buy e.g. Synology, QNAP etc. I haven't looked at it but I understand FreeNAS is in this space as well.

>2. Until there is a stable release of MS SQL on Linux (coming soon I'm told) there will be some very strange settings and setups required. I.e. AccountMate uses local DBF, shared DBF's, and MS SQL .

Ah, the joys of legacy code ;)

>3. For those that are using MS SQL will the SQL server require SMB2. Can there be a dual setting?

My understanding is the primary communications protocols for SQL Server in a Windows environment are TCP/IP and Named Pipes (dunno if newer versions support any others). AFAIK SMB is always present in Windows environments but I don't think SQL Server makes use of it.

Regarding SQL Server for Linux, my guess is it's designed to be a daemon that can run in an all-Linux environment, where there is no SMB whatsoever and all clients are running Linux/BSD/*n?x. I don't see that as an issue if it and its clients can talk via, say, TCP/IP.