>Here is there repley
>
>Like Access, VFP is isnt very scalable. I am sure you will get a ton of info on MSDN on it. (Thats why they have discontinued it) There is absolutely no comparision between VFP and SQL Server for mid to large applications. I agree for the smaller applications with very little concurrent load it works, however as the number of concurrent users increases performance degrades.
>
>As for the speed, I think you should conduct some tests on some large tables 10,000 records or more. You will see a big difference.

This guy is misinformed. FoxPro is not discontinued, why this continues to be a subject of interset is beyond me. Second, VFP is not like Access, it is scalable up to 2Gig per table. For most tables that would be millions of records. The only advantage (in the real world) to SQLServer is table size and security. SQLServer degrades under heavy use and is slower than FoxPro. Third, I would say if he thinks 10,000 records is "large", then he has nothing to worry about as far as scalability is concerned. And, frankly I have no idea where he would get the idea SQLServer would be faster running a query on 10,000 records. With VFP you have seemless connectivity whereas SQLServer has to use a connection. Four, what will he use as a GUI? If it is web work, the only advatage to SQLServer is size. Desktop, well then he will need another tool for the GUI. VB and ADO with a SQLServer backend is about as slow as it gets. Five, have him compare the cost of one developer using VFP and one developer, a DBA, and a SQL Server license fee. Last but not least, why work for someone who is so obviously out of touch with reality? No matter how much you might need the money, he will probably burn you.