On the whole, I would agree that each tool has its place. You are right, it is not a DBF vs. MSDE issue. That is why I would refrain from making it an either/or situation. Then again, there is nothing wrong with outlining the strengths/weaknesses of each.
>>Finally, 80% of the work you do with data should be in a disconnected manner. There are only 4 instances where you need to be connected to the backend data source:
>>
>>Updates
>>Deletes
>>Inserts
>>Queries
>>
>>Therefore, if you have 20 or so folks, you may find that at no time, do you have more than 5-8 connections.
>
>Good point. This would be good for small workgroups which require much of what SQL-Server has to offer.
>
>>And yes, MSDE would make for a great prototyping tool. Then again, if you are prototyping with it, would'nt that mean that your implementation will be SQL-Server? That would make the whole DBF vs. MSDE argument moot.
>
>No. It would mean that I was developing for enterprise SQL-Server in the first place. It has nothing to do with DBFs vs. MSDE.
>
>I think that you would agree that the MSDE vs. VFP data engine is not the issue here. There are projects where SQL-Server is better suited, where the VFP data engine is better suited, or combinations of the two.
>
>I just wanted to see how I could utilize MSDE, if at all.
Previous
Reply
View the map of this thread
View the map of this thread starting from this message only
View all messages of this thread
View all messages of this thread starting from this message only