Edward,

I'd be interested to know what your setup is. How fast is the WAN connection? Is the application running on a remote workstation with the DBFs on the local file server?

>I have VFP WAN system and performance is great. Don't ask my why, I have no idea how our WAN set, but it works really good.
>
>>Colin,
>>
>>I think we're talking about two different things here. You're talking about using remote control software like pcAnywhere to run VFP over a WAN. I'm talking about installing VFP on the remote machine and accessing the data on the host file server over the WAN just like you would over a LAN.
>>
>>>The biggest problem with VFP in terms of running it in a WAN situation or Citrix WinFrame (and similar technologies) is that VFP treats the entire display as one huge bitmap. If anything on a form needs to be refreshed the entire screen is refreshed and sent down the pipe. I'm hoping Tahoe has corrected this.
>>>
>>>>John,
>>>>
>>>>I have to believe that they've made an error in this case. I've run C/S apps over a 28.8 connection. The performance is sluggish, but bearable. I once tried running a FoxPro application over a 56K leased line connection. This is totally impractical. I'd love to hear from anyone who's running FoxPro over a WAN and is satisfied with the performance.
>>>>
>>>>I have a customer who ran similar tests with a sniffer and found a huge difference between VFP and C/S.
>>>>
>>>>Is it me or does STB's biggest competitor have a C/S version while STB does not.
>>>>
>>>>Just my 2cents.
>>>>
>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>A couple of months ago I attended a class at SBT Accounting (a large software company using Foxpro) were the class was told that they (SBT) had used a sniffer to compare C/S and foxpro net traffic and they discovered that C/S reduces traffic by (at best) 10% and only if the program is using very large databases. I don't have more information but I bet SBT can be contacted.
>>>>>
>>>>>John Fabiani