>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All very good points. Do you really put ALL the tools you will be using in a bid? Is it necessary? I agree that some of the software specs are needed especially if the backend is something like Oracle, SQL Server, etc., because overall costs will obviously be affected. I guess what should be included in a bid can vary on a case-by-case basis.

My customers do not care as long as it works and is reasonably fast.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It depends.... I have one current project where I am providing source code; one where I am not. The folks involved with the first one, of course, care a LOT more about what it's developed in. The IS department of the second also want to know, though I think it matters less.

The point I keep making during these threads ("shouldn't how well it works be the only criteria?") is that many companies want to know what the software they are purchasing was built in, sometimes for quite understandable reasons -- they have standards, they have bandwidth concerns, they may have concerns about future OS compatibility. This makes sense to them. If I was them, I also feel less comfortable hearing "oh it's developed in Regurtsquiggle from Joe Smith Enterprises" than "it's developed in Microsoft Visual Studio," assuming that there is a somewhat lesser chance of later incompatibilities or bizarre behaviors (I said "somewhat lesser chance").

The problem is, Visual FoxPro lies somewhere between RegurtSquiggle and C++. Where it lies, and how much it matters, depends on the company involved.