>Ed,
>
>I've tried understanding MS POV re: marketability of SQL Server by not enhancing VFP Database Security. But to my disappointment, lots of clients simply do not understand no matter how hard we explain to them about this. Client Server is oftentimes not a smart idea on small businesses because of budget constraints. COM, DCOM using VFP tables can be a good option but it needs a total rewrite on the existing application specifically those which has been implemented. We are not asking too much: just a little bit security on the Native VFP Table.

It still is a viable alternative - SQL Server and Oracle are not the only backends on the market, and one of the lower-cost backends like SQL Anywhere, or one of the Linux hosted backends like PostGress or (if rumors I've heard are true, a limited implementation of IBM's DB2 is now available for Linux as well. Both products offer all kinds of security features, and offer scalability options at low initial cost. If you need he features of a backend but feel SQL Server is too expensive, find another product with the features that you need at a price you like, and vote with your wallet. If there's an ODBC driver, VFP can talk to it through remote views and/or SPT.