>snip<

>Actually, you said something diofferent, something abominably ignorant.
>There is no compelling necessity to develop VFP application based on the only presumption that it will be moved to SQL-Server overnight. If client requests C/S application then I develop C/S application, if it requests file-server application then I develop file-server application. Period. Don't try to hide your ignorance behind scalability notion.

Ed,

Ugghh.. And let's continue using vacuumn tubes too since they work. *g*

To tell someone they are "abominably ignorant" can only be made if one presumes their own authority and moral superiority or adherence to a higher standard. While it may indeed be true that someone else has made such a statement it should be able to hold up to the light of commonly accepted and mutually agreed-upon standards. And, it also requires that there be some mechanism for arbitrating any dispute that might arise. It also presumes that the individual making such a pronouncement is willing to stand by the standard they expect others - otherwise they open themselves up to the charge of hypocrisy.

Are you such an authority? And, if so, would you be so kind as to explain to me where you have received this authority? Not that I question you but I'd be interested in how you arrived at where you say you are in order that I might follow your example. I'd like to be an authority too.

I've seen some folks over the years "self proclaim" themselves as "authorities" but most of them turned out to be self-absorbed gasbags.

In the posts I've read regarding 10 Things to Avoid in VFP Development I saw no reference to the notion that some future SQL migration was the only presumption being made. I did see people suggesting that when applications were being developed that some thought and planning should be considered with respect to the future of that application and that being able to embrace a future migration to a SQL-based or Remote backend would be (in my own words) very wise. I also saw some suggestions that this would ease any potential customer-driven change requests and that historically from the point of view of the message poster that this was a common occurrance. I must confess that I cannot remember ever creating an application that was not multi-user and that I can also see the benefit from this approach.

So, I'd be very interested in whether this approach you are advocating is based on some technical point I've missed over the last several years or whether it's just a way to, how do I say this nicely.., stay connected to a client and keep them dependent upon my services.

I am very curious about something (if you will forgive me for asking if it offends you); I'd like to know about where you grew up. I've seen some references to you speaking Russian (if I correctly recall) and have seen a thinking pattern that just facinates the heck out of me.

Best,

DD