>>"We scratch our heads when it comes to Visual FoxPro 5.0, which
>>even Microsoft can't seem to position. It's an excellent implementation
>>of the legacy Xbase technology. But, it's not as attractive as Microsoft
>>Access for desktop applications and it's not as robust as SQL Server with
>>a Visual Basic front end in large-scale tasks."
>
>I am confused by this paragraph. Why would they state that VFP is not as robust as SQL Server with a Visual Basic front end? Are they comparing VFP to SQL Server? I'm using VFP to create front ends to SQL Server. My co-workers are using VB3 to create front ends to SQL Server and Oracle Server. Yesterday I demonstrated how I use VFP to connect to the server and I showed some of VFP features. A co-worker did the same with VB3 with Q&E Multilink. I think VFP is a much better tool! If there are advantages to using VB over VFP, they sure aren't apparent to me.
>
>Jeff Rusch
>UW-Madison


Contrary to what Peter Coffee syas, VFP is a better front end to SQL Server than VB...and certainly better for desktop databases than Access. I have yet to read an article by Peter Coffee where he likes FoxPro.

Craig