John,

Thanks. I guess for me, with respect to the notion "What path do we take?", I'd have to think long and hard here. If all my users had W95/98 'puters I'd probably go the VFP route. If all had W2K loaded I'd be a lot more tempted to go the WSH route.

A commercial product like Rick's would probably cause me to go the way he seems to have gone; that is, do everything in VFP if at all possible.

It's a maintenance issue in my mind and I'd rather support one product rather than multiple unless I had local, absolute control.

Best,

DD

>WSH is part of Windows 2000. With prior OS's, the WSH needs to be installed. I have tested WSH with Windows 2000 and NT, and it works fine. I don't see why WSH would not work with Win98 or Win95.
>
>>John, et al,
>>
>>As someone who hasn't fooled with WSH I'm wondering about a couple things and maybe the answers will help shed a little more light on this great thread.
>>
>>What kind of issues are there with WSH vis a vis VFP with respect to OS compatibilities and so forth. Does WSH only work on W2K & NT & W98 but not W95 and stuff like that. If I had a client that contracted with me for a solution what are the practical management issues I'd need to think about?
>>
>>If I were to draw a circle that represented the whole useful spectrum of VFP and draw one for WSH where would the overlaps and non-overlaps be? That's what I'd want to know in order to be able to most effectively choose which should be use d when.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>DD