VFP Security
Ricardo Barradas
De: "Ricardo Barradas" <ricardo....@leadgest.com>
Para: "Rick Bean" <rgb...@NOSPAMmelange-inc.com>
Assunto: Re: reason for not adding security to database
Data: sexta-feira, 28 de Fevereiro de 2003 12:32
Hello,
Let me express an opinion...
I agree with you both and I disagree with you both!
First of all: Even If Visual FoxPro had any built-in security it would not
Kill (or even Wound) SQL-Server at all. SQL-Server is totally Client-Server
whereas VFP isn't. I cannot beleive that thousands of devellopers who use
client apps different from VFP would simply cease to access SLQ-S and start
to use VFP as a Back-end. Even new guys in the area wouldn't give much
thought into using VFP instead of SQL-S. However I do think it
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Bean" <rgb...@NOSPAMmelange-inc.com>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.fox.helpwanted
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: reason for not adding security to database
> Since VFP 7.0 and it's database events, almost any kind of security you
choose to implement is
> possible. The FP philosophy has always been to provide you the tools you
need to implement whatever
> you feel is "right".
>
> Rick
>
> "rguti" <roy...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:Eui7a.34323$4O5....@fe10.atl2.webusenet.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just a quick observation, which I'm pretty sure I know the answer but I
> > wanted some feedback also. Why has microsoft made no effort to put some
> > security on the fox database? I think b/c it will absolutely KILL SQL
Server
> > on the small market totally and a big chunck in the mid size market. So
is
> > there any hope for good security for the database? I think they will
first
> > rewrite VFOX in Delphi before they put good security for the foxpro
> > database. Comments?
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Roger Ansell
Hi!
> Let me express an opinion...
Go ahead ...
> I agree with you both and I disagree with you both!
Are you a programmer ... or a politician?
> First of all: Even If Visual FoxPro had any built-in security it would not
> Kill (or even Wound) SQL-Server at all. SQL-Server is totally
Client-Server
> whereas VFP isn't.
Wrong!
SQL-Server is a database server. End-of-story!
It is NOT client-server. It's _just a _server.
It's up to you how _you interface with the server.
>I cannot beleive that thousands of devellopers who use
> client apps different from VFP would simply cease to access SLQ-S and
start
> to use VFP as a Back-end.
I can't believe that _you can't figure out the difference.
VFP _is and _never was a database server.
>Even new guys in the area wouldn't give much
> thought into using VFP instead of SQL-S. However I do think it
"However I do think it ... "
I think you've missed the point (and your memory) <g>.
Roger
"Ricardo Barradas" <ric...@leadgest.com> wrote in message
news:3e5f58d6$0$15687$a729...@news.telepac.pt...
Ricardo Barradas
Thanks for letting me know all that stuff...
My memory is much better now! I assure you!
Ricardo
"Roger Ansell" <notm...@emailaddress.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:uiJfJoB4...@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...