Mike, John,

>>It is indefensible because the perceived threats that allegedly exist if the provider is freely distributed don't exist.
>
>Well, thats just one argument in the debate. If it were a bogus argument, it doesn't mean the position is indefensible.
>
>And FWIW, I think that its a pretty sound argument. For Web Services and Web Sites, the number of servers hosting and serving data these days is growing, and will continue to grow majorly for quite a while. Microsoft's solution is a SQL Server licsense for unlimited users. Whats that up to, $20,000 per CPU? Using VFP data is signficantly cheaper. The database itself is free of licensing, and the tool that gives you access to teh data costs about $500.
>
>My opinion is that if MS gives away access to the database (as you are suggesting) sales of VFP and SQL licenses are threatened. Can you prove that the threat does not exist?

I'm enjoying this debate. I'd be willing to bet that a similar one took place within MSFT and the VFP team as well.

Mike, your last question, "Can you prove that the threat does not exist?" is essentially impossible to answer as you are asking John to prove a negative. There's no way to be able to answer it but that doesn't mean you've won the argument. It's like a politician stating that they are in favor of clean air and using the pseudo-moral high ground to persume that it is their position that promotes clean air and subtly insinuating that their opponent's does not. Bad argument IMO. I'd think that the more appropriate question would be, "Do you think the risks and tradeoffs of growing the VFP market illegitimately are worth the potential opportunities to grow the market legitimately?" Personally, I think they are as either way the VFP market grows.

I happen to think that there will never be a point in time when a threat like this does not exist. The question IMO is not one of absolutes in this case but one of degree and the old "risk tolerance" factor. IOW, Microsoft has apparently made its determination of the risk it is willing to take on this issue and has decided it's position. End of case.

Now, I happen to think that you both have great points. I would take the route where there is more risk and release the driver personally. However, there may be other, unknown factors at play here. Perhaps there is a liability issue for example? Dunno, but I'd bet that there's more here than meets the eye.

Your point about the expense of SQL is well taken but I could counter that with the general lack of knowledge on how best to develop a VFP application - particularly with only the OLE DB driver. A lot harder than perhaps most non-VFP types might be willing to tackle?

Regardless, Happy New Year!