>Jeff,
>
>Thanks for your point of view.

You're welcome Silvia! ;-)

That argument was valid until the advent of MSDE (SQL-Server Jr.), which MS has decided to give away for free if the app you're building can live within MSDE's limitations. Otherwise, according to what I read in Les Pinter's site, MS would make more money because the end user would have to purchase SQL-server.

As far as vb and databases, I was under the impression that it includes the Jet engine so your users don't need to get copies of Access in order to have the right to use a database app written in vb.

Regarding outlook and automation, I'm barely automating word at this point, so can't really give you an oppinion there.

Cheers!

Alex


>My personal opinion is that it is also inexpensive to build applications in VFP. Unlike VFP, VB does
>not have its own desktop database and requires a database software (and is there anything else?).
>I think that that is a good reason why MS would rather promote VB than VFP, not only that VB can
>be a better programming language for some apps, of course..
>
>About running Outlook in VFP, I do not think that ADO is necessary to do it. It looks like there is a
>confusion between Active X Object and Active Data Object in the statement which I quote below from
>my first message:
> "....when using ADO(ActiveX Data Objects) controls to automate Office97 and Microsoft Outlook."
>
>What do you think?
>
>Although I have not employed Outlook in my app I know that I need to call it as an Active X control
>inside my app to do that. I do not think that it requires ADO. Or... am I wrong?
>(Quite honestly, I am trying to find out whether the guy that said that knows what he's talking about which
>I do not think so, or whether he knows something that I don't.)
>
>Thanks,
>Evelyn