Hi Cindy,
>
>If you use the new OLE-DB data provider for SQL-Server, you don't even need to install ODBC on the client machine. There are OLE-DB providers for the most popular SQL databases including MS SQL-Server, and Oracle.

Thanks for the info, but I just wanted to ensure Brian didn't think that help entry was implying he has to install the dev tools on all their client workstations.

Also, ODBC still has its uses. For example, I recently became (painfully?) familiar with some of the various OLE DB providers for the AS/400, and their usage with VFP, and SQL Server.

I spent all last month evaluating, and debugging the Client Access (IBM's implementation) and OLE DB via ODBC provider configurations for the AS/400 to set up a Linked Server (the provider from HiT software ( http://www.hit.com ) was the best for this, IMHO).

SNA Server comes with one too, but I didn't go there, as I had someone else's deadline to meet. In the end we didn't use a linked server (or OLE DB) at all, but wrote a VFP COM component using ODBC to sync the data that we were working with. It sits on the Server all by its lonesome, and plays gatekeeper for the big boys :)

HiT's provider costs about $1000 for a server license, so that was a factor in our decision. Also to be fair there are some (very poorly advertised) patches for the Client Access Provider that may allow it to work with OLE DB implementations newer than 1.0 (that's the one they distribute for some sadistic reason). Didn't find those until later.

My point is, sometimes the maturity of ODBC makes it attractive, in some cases, especially simple ones.

Later,
Bill