>You are right about the 2GB limitation being too much interwoven in the product. The limitation is based on a signed integer (+/- 2^32) or is that signed word integer. To incease that limitation would require months of rewrite of the database engine. Perhaps introducing several bugs in the process. I do not think the VFPT want to take that kind of risk. Even VFPT suggest SQL Server as a solution around the 2GB limitation.

Clever ploy on their part, eh? After you take their suggestin and use SQL Server as a solution around the 2 Gig limitation, they come and bust you for working around the 2 gig limitation. ;)

>
>my 1 cent.
>
>>I read the technical limitations to mean, but not necessarily limited to, the system limits found in the help file. Let's take the 2GB limit on tables. When the design of the table was drawn up, there was a physical limit on HD size that was less than GBs. I suspect the team came up with the actual limit because it is 2 to some power to get to the 2 GB limit or somesuch. The point is that 2GB limit at the time it was set was not arbitrary. If the VFP team were to increase or remove that limit, it would almost mean an entire rewrite of the VFP data engine or at least an enormous amount of additional work and not just the changing of the table structure itself. That is not something that the team has as a priority.
>>
>>To relate this to the EULA, licensees are not allowed to tinker with the internal workings of VFP to circumvent the 2GB limit of a table. It does NOT say that you can not design a way to split tables up or come up with other imaginative ways to handle similar data that is more than 2GB in size. If that were so, I think the EuroTunnel app would be in grave danger.
>>
>>>Sorry, I can't kill this now, but this was meant for Mark, not Victor.
>>>
>>>Are you suggesting then that work around technical limitations in the software and reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software mean exactly the same thing? If that's the case, why say it twice (with one of those times being extremely obtuse). If not, then how do you reconcile work around technical limitations in the software with hacking the exe or dll? This EULA is written for developers, and I'd say that pretty much all developers use the words 'work around' to mean the same thing, and it doesn't mean 'hacking the software'. Why would MS use that wording in such an unusual way?
>>>
>>>Now, I agree that this probably doesn't really mean that I'm prohibited from working around the 2 gig table limitation by using SQL server as a back end, but still, the wording seems to say I am (provided that's really one of the reasons I'm doing it).
>>>
>>>It's too bad lawyers can't ever seem to say what they actually intend.