>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure everybody sees the value of SP, SPT and data classes. But does that mean that RVs should be consigned to the dustbin? I don't think so. If you do, that's fine.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

PMFJI, John... But, I don't think I have seen such a strong statement or attitude about RVs. Most of the posts I have read on this thread that advocate other approaches (SPs, etc.) have also admitted that RVs have their place. You might disagree with what this place should be, but I really haven't seen much of a "never ever useful" attitude on this thread.

Now for my own two cents. Visual Studio/FoxPro folks engage in many types of programming. It sounds as if you have been able to work just fine with remote views. More power to ya. For my own part, unless I was 100% sure that the solution I was working on was going be used only with VFP front and middle-layers, currently or in the future, I would stay away from remote views. If I will need to be wrapping up data access/update logic into middle layer objects anyway, for calls from some UI, I would not consider the "benefits" of RVs to be that helpful: sure, they are simpler to use and code but if you are wrapping functionality into middle-layer objects you are (in theory) hiding the complexity from future developers anyway (yes, I know, I know, theory isn't practice... but the more I work with wrapping data access approaches up into middle layers, the more natural and flexible it feels).

I use RVs primarily for data-mining and interactive work. They are really useful for such purposes. For app development-- I just haven't been sold yet, and after 20,000 posts I am beginning to think I won't be. But again, we all engage in different types of work -- if I was doing more data mining than I already am (god help me) I probably would rely more on RVs.