>>We have been pushing for SQL-Server for years, but with no luck.
>>
>>Not sure why some people are having a hard time being convinced of the DBF's flaws.....
>
>You've changed your tune a bit Kev. Not so long ago you remonstrated on this forum that the council were looking to move away from VFP and you didn't seem to like it one bit. Suddenly, DBF's (that are at the very heart of Foxpro) don't cut it anymore?

Move away from VFP, no I didn't like it, the move was to VB+SQL Server, the move to VB was part I didn't agree with, not the moving of DBF to SQL Server, we've been aiming for that conversion for years now. I'll dig up the thread if I can, I'm pretty sure I didn't praise DBF's that much.

DBF's may make VFP different from the rest, but I don't agree they are all VFP is. What about the fact that it's OO? The amount of useful functions it holds, that you won't find native to VB? How about the nice built-in SQL Server support? There's more to VFP than just DBF's IMO.

>If you turn off a PC running any application, it is likely to cause problems. As for FPT's, I never use them in applications to store application data - period. They are well know for problems if someone pulls the plug on the w/station. If you need to use them, the application should close the table referencing the FPT as soon as possible. FWIW, I created a memo file replacement using straight DBFs years ago so, data (text) appears to be in memos but it is written to and from dbfs. As always, if you know your tool, you can workaround known issues. Whilst I use SQL server and like it very much, it is not Nirvana for a number of reasons.

Having the time to create the work-arounds is also nice :-)

Kev