>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)?

Marc, I have experimented with configurations similar to yours. Generally speaking, if one is dealing with 486SX machines, then several things are different and warrant considedration. For example: the disk i/o is likely via a Local Bus 32-bit IDE interface or standard ISA 16-bit IDE interface. The disk drives are probabably in the 300 megabyte range. This configuration is quite a bit slower than today's PCI interfaces with EIDE drives. Likewise, the video will also be slower. But neither of these issues are show stoppers.

I agree with previous responses that Win95 (vs WinNT) is the way to go for your client machines.

If you can tolerate the relatively slow system startup and application startup times, then I think you will find your existing workstations acceptable, *assuming* that you will be using VFP primarily as a client and housing your data on an MSSQL server. The most important thing in running VFP in Win95 is (based on my experiences) you will need 16 meg of RAM on your clients.