Wayne,

Yes thanks. Again I am aware terminal server and Citrix alternatives. But as I understand it, that would require investments in Hardware at the server side.

We were wondering if we could do without that, by opening a 500 kb line that would allow us peaks to 2Mb that we need anyway for videoconferencing.

It has always been my intention to go COM. It's my understanding that if I do that, I will have a kind of a client server alternative, keeping the advantage of the flexibility of VFP. Am I (1) undersanding that wrongly or (2) underestimating the problems I will getting into?

You see, what I believe to be my framework accesses the dbc only from bzobjects that I could include in an .exe that would run on the server, and my (sowhat thinnner) clients woudl then instantiate the objects and retrieve the info in ad hoc properties.

Tell me if my mid term strategy is doable.

TIA,

Marc





>>>
>>>You should consider a thin client solution...
>>
>>Yes I understand. I could rewrite the existing software (I've been more or less working in 3 thier) using com but that would take some time. 've never compiled a .dll in my life (if you see what I mean).
>>
>>Anyway... thanks....
>
>Thin client is not a rewrite in com, it is a solution to exactly what you are running. Have you ever run pcAnywhere, Terminal Server, etc. That's thin client.
>
>Your users will run a small client software on their computer which will connect to a server at your office. The server is where the actual application will run - with only the drawing of the screen sent to your client's machines. It is very fast, and a perfect fit for what you describe.
>
>Take a look here... http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/technologies/terminal/default.asp