Hi Mike,
"Just as fast"?
I think that you can much faster, and not only Fox + native DBF's, but even Fox + SQL Server.

Suggestion:
Posting samples, or even lines of code, with how things can be done in Foxpro+DBF or Foxpro+SQL Server and what is needed for the same thing to be achieved using ADO.NET + SQL Server

Example (client-server):

SQLPREPARE(nHandle, ;
[INSERT INTO some_table (col1, col2, col3, col4) values (?m.col1 , ?m.col2, ?m.col3, ?m.col4)])
SQLEXEC(nHandle)

Or, how to do lookup in a 3000 customers table ?
With Foxpro, easy, SET KEY or SEEK, instantly, without the need that entire table to be loaded in memory.

Or, how to work OFFLINE, again, for client-server?
With Foxpro, easy, offline views or local tables.

I think this thread will be interesting.


>Hi John,
>
>You said:
>
>>The fact is - it cannot be demonstrated that the combination of ADO .NET + SQL Server cannot be more flexible and faster than Fox + native DBF's.
>
>Removing the double negative, just for clarity sake:
>
>It can be demonstrated that the combination of ADO .NET + SQL Server can be as flexible and as fast as Fox + native DBF's.
>
>I think that I can demonstrate that Fox programs accessing Fox data can be more flexible and just as fast.
>
>I bet I can demonstrate this.
>
>How do we proceed? Using the UT Member's critieria as a suggested guidelines for flexibility is obviouslly going to be biased. Do you have suggestions that can even out this bias?