>>If you're concerned about up-front RDBMS costs, keep an eye open on Linux developments. I understand that there is now a decent free back-end available, PostGRES SQL, and a Windows ODBC driver is available.
>>
>>Of course, there's no free lunch here, Linux configuration and management costs are going to be scarce and more expensive in the short term. I'd look closely at upcoming Linux-based "appliance" servers that could easily have a back end installed on them.
>>
>>If you went this route, theoretically you could spend some time optimizing a standard Linux installation plus your backend setup, then "ghost" the hard drive to create a new backend box for a new client. Wow, no software licence fees - what a concept!
>
>
>I've actually looked into PostGres SQL (or PostGreSQL) on Linux. Glad to know I'm not the only one who has considered this radical idea. Do you know of anyone who is using it with VFP?
>
>If I went this route I would probably want to sell the hardware too. Set up both the back-end and middleware boxes for the client, import their existing data (easier said then done), test them thoroughly, and ship them (or bring them) to the client. You could buy quite a nice Linux server for the 5-10 grand that you don't have to spend for SQL and NT\Win2K. I would run VFP on Win2K of course with a fast channel between the two boxes. Could make quite a sweet combination.
>
>Peter

No, I don't know anyone doing this with VFP. If you're using a middle tier as well as a backend, there are advantages in having only one box and OS vs. having two of each (presumably you could host your middle tier on the same box as the backend if it was Win2K/NT).

Importing existing data is usually the ugliest step in a scenario like this.