>Hi,
>
>We are going to upgrade a mainly DOS FPD 26 computer system (+/- 20 stations) into a Windows 95 environment under VFP. Our planning is as follows:
>
>Fase 1: rewrite the dos application into VFP, leave the data more or less as they are.
>Fase 2: go C/S - probably SQL Server.
>
>Should be done between this and say 1 year max.
>
>User needs are more or less confined to the application under VFP within the planning horizon (no Web, moderate Office, some C/S but of secundary importance).
>
>Response times to the server is our main concern, but we are now running 486 SX Compaqs with 12 Meg (the server is powerful) and are satisfied (but remember, we are still running the application in DOS).
>
>Now here are my questions:
>
>a) do we _need_ NT on our stations?
>b) is there any advantage of going NT on station level (my experience on smaller systems on W95/VFP is satisfactory as far stability is concerned).
>c) is the extra investment (Scusi, more memory) in the quality of the stations worth the advantage in (b)?
>
>Or am I not seeing something?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Marc
First, a mix of W95 stations and a NT server is a nice config. Allows to move to SQLServer whenever and in the interium run VFP native on both station (app code) and server (VFP DBCs/Tables). Plug&Play along is a strong reason for the W95 stations. I hope that you are planning to upgrade to at least 90MH Pentiums for the stations and 200+ on the server. W95 on a 486DX is not a pretty picture and I don't even want to think about NT on anything except RISC or Pentiums. Stay a vanilla as possible on the network hardware and invest (spend $$) on a well sized server - it's going be around a long time.
HTH