Personally, I have everything running as either RDP or web interfaces. The host can be a VM. I have used Virtualbox a bit. May be not the best but it's free, and can be setup to run as a headless service. What I don't like about RDP is the client access licences, but that is a one-off cost. I would say a factor is the type of user interface. RDP is good for strictly database interaction, pretty bad for graphics.
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:42 AM, AndyHC <a...@hawthorncottage.com> wrote: > A multi-user dbf based VFP app does /not/ work very well over a [local] > network. The upgrade path I used (and would recommend) if first go to > remote views, then migrate to a dbms backend. With the app (and, > optionally, dbc) on the users' machines (downloading the app is SLOW - > reserve that for updates) and the data on the server you should have no > problem moving the server to a remote location/ the Cloud (though I've > never done Cloud computing). > Let's face it, dbf's were really designed for single users, sharing can be > flakey, and downloading entire dbf's over a network is a no-no. > > > On 27/12/2013 22:51, kamcgin...@gmail.com wrote: > >> I would trust Christof with the exact definition. >> >> Our company and many of our clients are running almost everything from >> 'cloud' servers now. All our software is written in vfp9 sp2. >> >> What we do is not worry about the server hardware or location. We just >> ask one question: Can we have win2003 standard server (I am sure other >> versions work fine, but we like that xp-like interface). If it does then >> you can install your vfp9 sp2 application exactly like it is on an >> xp/vista/win7, etc computer on your local network. The only difference is >> that you access it with RDP. FTP your usual installation application onto >> the server to a folder like C:\Temp and install as usual. The cloud servers >> we have helped install all give you an administrator and one user account. >> If you want other simultaneous users, you will need to pay more per user >> and possibly add more memory depending on the performance you require. If >> you have used win2003 server then you won't need any training. >> >> We have many users who have a win200x server on their local network >> accessed by various computers: xp, vista, win7, etc. This requires someone >> to maintain it and can be expensive. You can easily move those users to the >> cloud and eliminate almost all your support headaches once it is working >> smoothly. >> >> You will have to work out printing and access to usb, etc - I can't >> advise on that. >> >> >> On 12/27/2013 4:10 AM, Christof Wollenhaupt wrote: >> >>> A virtualized server is a server that runs on a system like VMWare, >>> Hype-V >>> or Xen. These systems enable the installation on multiple computers on a >>> single physical machine. Such a server looks exactly like a physical >>> server >>> to your application. >>> >>> If your application does not access any special hardware (USB devices, >>> serial port, extension cards) then it will run on a virtual server just >>> like on a physical server. I've been running virtual machines and servers >>> for many, many years now. >>> >>> You might want to check, though, if your client has got their terminology >>> right. They may refer to a Terminal Service like Windows TS or Citrix. >>> That's a whole different thing and there are indeed some issues in VFP >>> apps >>> that you might need to test. >>> >>> >> [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAKT3oPcm9Pt+w7h6tnRZ_faae73VyLdh23=QKkXVb3BDYsu=h...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
