>Judging by your e-mail address: i486dx@prodigy.net - I think I understand where you may be coming from<s>.

Hehe....I've used the same moniker (i486dx) for years....I keep it for sentimental reasons...not because I have an old mentality ;-)


>Please let me apologize up front. There are parts of my response that are harsh. It is not directed at you. Rather - this issue of a VFP-centric world and VFP developers "protecting there turf" - for the sake of nothing but protecting their own self interest really bugs me.

No apology necessary. Maybe you misunderstood me. I am not trying to protect turf...I am not the type who blindly throws Fox at all situations. I am an experienced developer in VB4, VB5, SQLServer 6.5, and am learning SQLServer 7.0 Beta. Just to mention MS tools.

Sooo...in the right situation, VFP is best used, if at all, with other development tools. But there are cases, often mis-identified, where a single solution is preferable and Fox covers enough bases (front end, middleware, backend) to be that single solution *where appropriate*.

As to EXE size, please convince me that a VB app of moderate size talking to SQL Server using alphabet soup (ADO,DAO,RDS,whatever) running on a P75 with 16MB of RAM will outperform VFP talking to....err...VFP.

VFP is superior to VB in RAD. VFP is superior to VB as an object-oriented development tool where business rules can be classed and ActiveX controls can be subclassed or wrappered. VFP is a far, far superior in small to moderate sized systems that *do not* require a c/s architecture.

Also, as to ADO....I LIKE ADO! I have used it in a few VB projects and I look forward to it being in Tahoe.

>3x the cost and 10x the speed? Are your numbers correct here?

My numbers are sadly correct...see another one of my posts in this thread for a concrete example.

>Like it or not, in many organizations - the DBF format for storing data is not credible. Don't get me wrong - I think the DBF format is the most flexible and easily maintained formats out there. After all, you don't need to go through a DBA to change a field specification or to reindex. That’s nice. However, that is not representative of the bigger world.>

I do not disagree....but in a non-client/server project, are you seriously going to tell me that the JET database engine talking to VB is superior? In a client/server environent I do not disagree with you at all. SQL Server is my back-end of choice for C/S.

As to relevency to Ross's post...you know, you're right. He is forced into the situation and, as he describes it, he probably should go VB. I guess I lost the context and was annoyed that you were going down the "VB is God" garden path. Say what you will about Fox people, but we generally tend to understand things better. I have known far too many VB "developers" who don't know what a foreign key is, for example or put code on the client side that belongs in middleware or a stored procedure because they didn't understand 2- 3-tier c/s architecture.

>The VFP developers who sell people on 100% VFP solutions - because it is what he/she knows - is just as guilty as the consultant who preaches VB and SQL/Server 100% of the time because that is what he/she knows.>

Sad, isn't it? But you find that attitude all over the place, not just in VFP.

>A good example is the SQL for Smarties Column in DBMS. In that column, Joe Celko - who I have spoken with at a conference and whom I respect a great deal - was explaining how to migrate from Access to SQL/Server. The case appeared to me to be one where it would have been more appropriate to migrate from Access to VFP. Unless you are in the VFP community - you would not have come to this conclusion - which is where the problem lies.
>

I agree 100% with the statement that SQL Server devices beat out VFP databases...but only where the scale of the project demands a standalone database,ie, a c/s environment. BTW, have you looked at SQL ver 7.0? It is *sweet*.

>Many VFP developers - not all mind you as I know many progressive developers - should wake up - smell the coffee - and stop being so concerned with protecting their agendas and defending their turf. Rather, you, and many other VFP developers should take a deep breath - take a look at the world around them - and see what is going on.
>
>IT IS NOT A VFP ONLY WORLD!
>

No kidding John...but neither is it a VB ONLY world. In my experience, you have a heck of a lot more VB developers thinking it's a VB only world than VFP people thinking that way...IMHO