>>I agree with Craig. I would like to have to option of building tables, indexes and SPs and the like in a better IDE (like VFP).
>
>Do you have specific complaints about the SQL IDE? If so, I think that weaknesses in the SQL IDE should be addressed in the SQL product, not in another product.
>
>If not, then are you really just requesting a SQL IDE that you can use without hitting ALT+TAB? Though it looks like I'm in the minority here, this seems a frivolous feature to me- a VFP interface would almost certainly give only a subset of the SQL interface's functionality, and would have to keep up revision-wise with SQL's evolving featureset.
>
>Personally, I would like a VFP grid that could bind to a recordset, or an ActiveX grid that plays nice with VFP _and_ as much functionality/ flexibility as our VFP grid has.
>
>Beyond that, I can't see how VFP's integration could be all that much better without just being silly.
>
>> The behind the scenes functionality to do this is already there using SQL-DMO. It would just be the interface that would need to be created for VFP.
>
>Which wouldn't be _that_ big of a deal. As you can see from my SPBuilder util in the files section, creating a VFP front-end for SQL Admin tasks is not a whole lot of work. Now getting syntax coloring and Intellisense in there would be quite an undertaking...

Why you overlook SQLServer (or generally Serverbased databases) with vfp integration? Dont you think is important for VFP future? Powerbuilder has built a market on beeingn the perfect client for every database thru its very good datawindow (but still PB is missing local data engine and this is advance for us). Just make a survey to 100 fortune companies or ask which is the competitor to the client server arena to VB.You will see that this is PowerBuilder. Make a query to job servers for Powerbuilder developers especially in Europe and you will see the difference in popularity comparing to VFP. If SQLServer-Vfp integration is so good as it is for instanse Powerbuilders, why corporate developers do not adopt it for client server work?? And please dont answer that this is due to marketing reasons ... Sure, some things can be done with Fox but not so easy as with PB. For instanse embeded SQL is impossimple in VFP, you have to pass string and the result set is always a cursor you cannot have it in a variable or array. Transactions with Serverbased Databases are a pain with VFP, Error handling the same ...Wouldnt be nice if i had intellisense thru an open connection (as far as the objects of the data dictionary are concerned )with SQL Server (or any other Database ???). ADO is slow so why not having a native integration with SQL Server and a better bind technology ... Powerbuilder has native drivers not with one but with many DBMSes.

I think this conversation is important for VFP future (for many reasons one of which : if VFP is the best client of SQL Server in 2-tier or 3-tier arena and marketed as such then it will be very for anyone to kill it ...)

Thank You