>>>Thank you, Hank. I decided to cancel trying to find a Cloud solution for deploying my app. What got me looking into it is a couple of prospective customers didn't want to have any IT work done and put it all on the vendor (me). Next prospective customer asks for it, I will just say No. If they cannot afford or cannot do IT, I am out of their picture.
>>
>>It is feasible but not when executing with remote dbf tables. You need to put everything over there - your exe, tables etc - and have them access it via terminal services or citrix.
>>
>>Alternately, you run locally but keep SQL in the cloud. I've seen that done, and depending on how much you pull down or push to server, may work just fine. The nice part is that a VFP app isn't too demanding in today's terms (processing power etc) so no special hardware is required locally, even six year old boxes should run it fine, and you don't have to reserve that much processing space per client on the server. The bad part is that if you're pulling huge cursors from SQL, you may need to wait. But nowadays the speed of the net is up to video streaming, so just pulling a dozen thousand records off a server can't be too slow.
>
>First, terminal services and citrix are out of the question.

Less work/learning there compared to running asp web apps ;-)


>I don't know these technologies and some customers do not want to have IT involved at all (or, I should say, that IT does not want to be involved). But from your message I get one thing. If I have SQL Server in the cloud and put everything, executable, meta data, configuration, etc. on each client PC, then - theoretically - they don't need a VM server. Which, of course, makes maintaining the application a little challenging (every update, each client PC has to be updated). But it is feasible. I just don't know if it is worth the pain to go through all these jumping through the hoop.

Just delegate the updating to a program and/or SQL server ;-)