>
>Just one simple question Kevin.
>
>Are DBF really that bad?

If I may...

All of my ma-pop shops use DBF for they can't afford SQL Server nor do they need it. I've had very good experience with DBF with very little problem so far. The problems is 99% index corruption and I've given them a program that can't recreate indexes if they go kah-poot.

They archive their data every two years, before the DBFs get too big, and start with fresh tables and DBC.

I happen to think that native DBF is what makes Foxpro most valuable to me.

Anyway. I'm getting a little off the subject, so I'll stop.