Al -

Thanks so much for the reply. Extremely informative.

I will take a look at the demo and see what other issues/information I can gather before making my proposal to the client. They are not necessarily Mac bigots (they run a mixed environment of Apple and Intel workstations), but have a business need that precludes this particular department from using anything other than Macs.

I think you are right... the VirtualPC solution (or vote against it) may be a result of prior versions. I did use a similar product way back and though cool, it was essentially too buggy and sluggish to be a real solution. If virtualPC has taken care of that, I do think it could be the most cost-effective solution for them both in terms of cost, and given the fact that the application is essentinally used by only two people these days.

My plan as of right now is not to fight the FileMaker v. VirtualPC/VFP battle, but rather work with them to define the functinality that want to keep/augment/add to the existing application, then put together a formal proposal for the FileMaker Pro option, but also suggest (and deliniate the cost savings) that VirtualPC/VFP would be a much more feasible approach. If at the end of the day they just want it to be FileMaker Pro no matter what the cost-benefit ratio is, then I will scream and yell a bit to try to get them to make a smarter choice, but will then get to work. I just feel it would be much more expensive a solution, especially since running the existing FPM 2.6 app under VFP would not take much effort at all.

Thanks again.... and stay tuned!