Hi Jack,

No insult taken (I think) and yes, it has worked out fine that the client went ahead with Terminal Server. I am aware of how it works. Actually my recommendation was to not go to Citrix which they did with mediocre results and then they 'upgraded' to Terminal Server and I am pleased as punch.

Due to the large size of the app, the multiple remote locations and the volume of data and transactions, I had recommended upgrading to a Client Server architecture. The success of Terminal Server, at least in this case, has made that move unnecessary, at least for now.

I was wondering why you chose to put quotes around my word Enterprise ?

This app runs every aspect of an enterprise with sales in excess of $220M from order entry of a variety of operations through full accounting. It includes EDI and Satellite interfaces and makes use of MS Office products and several Third Party products in addition to VFP. What would it take to qualify as an enterprise wide application in your terms ?

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10.... oh go ahead and send it <g>

Thanks, Ken



>Citrix WinFrame and Terminal Server (based on Citrix technology) only send screen updates and print jobs to the client workstation. All processing happens on the server. That's why your VFP "Enterprise" app works for your client; it's probably good that they didn't listen to you (not to be taken as in insult)...
>
>Denise, if you want decent performance on a WAN using a VFP solution, then you should seriously check out MS Terminal Server. Citrix WinFrame will only run VFP 5 apps effectively as it is still a NT 3.51 extension; however, the Citrix MetaFrame add on for MS Terminal Server increases its performance...
>