I am totally with you on that - not every user is a fortune 50 shop with an IT department longing for the buffet line at MS .NET seminars.

The apps I've seen are clunkers - some projects are moving back to layered solutions after several years and several million feeding .NET certified benchies.

>Hi
>Strange! To give up the power and responsiveness of a desktop application for WEB pages seems a bad decision to me, specially for an intranet with not so many users and good server.
>If this is the future, then what about 'no touch deployment' in .NET (rich client with the Internet serving as transport mechanism) ?
>
>This guy I believe is right:
>http://www.pantos.org/atw/perspectives/0203.html
>
>
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>This morning I had to hear yet another reason why everybody should migrate to dotNET.
>>
>>Deployment.
>>
>>Deployment? Yes! There is a new corporate decision in one of my clients that no software (i.e. applications) should be installed in a user's PC.
>>
>>I argued that *all* my applications don't reside in user's PCs and that there is no install routines whatsoever in order for a user to use *any* of my applications (all .exe reside in specific server's directories, and .ini files and dbfs as well). All that should be done is to create a shortcut in user's PC desktop to start the program and, if that's the case, configure an ODBC connection if the app needs to access an SQL backend. Aha!!! so you *must* install something in a user's PC!
>>
>>I also presented the WTS option. NO! All should be done via "web" access (i.e. using a browser) and *all* apps should be web applications, accessed by and running under a browser, and... it should be developed in dotNET!
>>
>>That's all.
>>
>>Thanks for your time reading this message
>>
>>Fernando

Imagination is more important than knowledge