Hi Jim!

Hope all's well with you!

In the Q&A session (last hour) at the Fort Lauderdale devcon, a woman got up to thank the vfp team for creating a product that includes a free database with it because that allowed her to keep her products' costs low.

While I thought about getting up to voice my take on this, the floor was closed and I never got to say my piece. Until now...

This is just my opinion, but I don't think I'm so far off-base here (also my opinion hehehe).

You see, I think that this database "freeness" is what will eventually kill vfp as we know it.

The first time I thought about this was after reading an essay by Les Pinter a few years ago, where he stated that vfp applications don't produce any revenue to Microsoft. While they may be faster and as reliable as a vb-sqlServer system, Microsoft wouldn't see a cent of profit other than the developer's license to use vfp and write as many apps as life and time permited, whereas in the vb-sqlServer scenario, Microsoft would see new revenue whenever the system was deployed. That alone is enough of a purely business reason for MS not to invest as much marketing vfp as it does other products.

If we as developers start pushing vfp + MSDE/SQLServer instead of pure vfp solutions, we will be helping put MS' name in the limelight. Even if we just bundle MSDE with our solutions, we will, in effect, be "selling Microsoft".

If MS were to remove the dataengine from vfp, they will definitely piss a lot off developers, but quite frankly, I don't see any other way for a product as out of place as vfp in the grand design, to last as long as we'd all like it to.

As it is, there are already acceptable solutions for everyone's data needs: JET is probably mature enough for a single-user application (I'm speculating here eh!), MSDE is just fine for a small company with a handful of users, and the full-blown SQL-Server is what you'd use at a larger scale. I don't think it's realistic to insist that vfp's data engine has a place in this family of products.

VFP's language, however, is EXTRAORDINARILY rich no matter how you look at it. By itself, it, and the IDE, have fantastic features, and the removal of the data engine (leaving the ability to work on cursors there), wouldn't hinder it at all. I think it would open a number of doors that right now are tightly shut or don't exist at all.

As for Jim Duffy's remarks, don't take him seriously. I don't think he'd appreciate it ;-)

Have fun!

Alex


>I've just finished reading about the session "SQL Server Development for VFP Developers" by Jim Duffy and I must say that I don't like what I read!
>
>The term "real database" really is a subjective one and the qualifiers described in the article are technical and (to a degree) misleading.
>I am quite confident that the majority of small-medium sized business owners would be perfectly satisfied with the capabilities and functionality provided by VFP's DBC/DBF!
>
>That VFP is '...only a "file based" database...' does have some advantages, again especially for small/medium businesses but the implication is that there is absolutely nothing good about "file-based"!
>
>There is then several paragraphs regarding the 'benefits' of deploying/shipping MSDE with an application.
>"Benefit" #1 - MSDE is free.
>- That's good... ship something that you barely understand as the prime storage medium for your application!
>"Benefit" #2 - Use the full product during development (to use the administrative tools).
>- Another goodie... what do you do when a user has problems and you have no administrative tools handy?
>- Not to mention the need to license full SQL Server as one of your development tools.
>"Benefit" #3 - Use client/server architecture from the beginning ("...even if there will be only one user for that application").
>- There's real good common sense at work!!!
>"Benefit" #4 - Scale very easily at any time.
>- Yep, be ready for something that's never going to happen (in 99% of small/medium businesses)!
>"Benefit" #5 - "...“5 simultaneous queries” limitation... should not impact at all" (in an environment with 20 connections).
>- Go ahead, bet your business and reputation on that!!!
>- That VFP affords hundreds of connections is not a factor I guess!
>"Benefit" #6 - 2GB limit same as VFP's table size limit.
>- Bzzzzzzz wrong answer! - VFP's is a per table limitation while MSDE's is a all the data limit.
>"Benefit" #7 - "...it's just a matter of the client buying some enterprise licenses of SQL Server...".
>- That's so easy and so cheap that ALL small/medium businesses will no doubt be chomping at the bit to do that right away. Absolutely no other problems involved with such a move!
>
>The article then describes some options for deploying MSDE-based applications using VFP.
>Stored procedures have lots of advantages.
>- I guess I can just go ahead and write these in VFP?...oh, you mean I have to learn a different language AND the particulars of how stored procedures work in SQL Server!
>- How, again, do I arrange installation of fixed/enhanced stored procedure at existing user sites????
>
>All in all the article describes grossly over-simplified "arguments" in favour of SQL Server, all at the expense of VFP/DBCs/DBFs.
>
>Were coupons for your developer copy of SQL Server handed out at the session's end? Sure sounds like they should have been.