>In the recent cover issue of MIND magazine (I think it is at www.microsoft.com/mind), they make it clear that Access is not as powerful as VFP (not the point of the article, but the tone is there).
>
>There is a MS tool for selecting the right development platform. I don't think Access is even a consideration.
>
>Like Craig B. said, Access targets end users. There are advantages to Access. Only none of the advantages are that it is more powerful. It is that a beginner can use Access.
>
>You can also throw them the idea that Access is dead. Hey, we've been hearing about it with FoxPro for so long. I think it may actually be true for Access.
>
>Access is not Object Oriented. Maybe Object-based or some other term meaning a Windows tool that has visual controls, but it is not an OOP language.
>
>It is funny. MS will slight VFP by not mentioning it in presentations, but whenever they compare tools, they always speak highly of VFP. I think part of the problem is that most presenters know a little (or more) VB...therefore they know VBA....therefore they know Access...so when they speak, they can stay within their comfort level by mentioning VB and Access.
>
>I made the mistake saying "VFP is better, but Access is still good if you want to go that way." Well, they went with Access and I had to develop in Access. Luckily this was a small part-time project. From now on I will say VFP or nothing for database appllications. If I run out of work, I might change my mind. But I won't like it!
>
>Joe
>
>

Access is NOT dead. Look at Access 2000....a VERY cool product.