At 01:56 PM 15/08/2003 +0000, you wrote:

>Daniel,
>
> That would be nice if I didnt have users that
>have literally unpacked a computer system, plugged
>it together, and turned it on. Several of these are
>out of state and I cannot afford to talk them through
>a complete setup of their systems beyond basic
>networking. Some of these are even peer-to-peer and
>do not have an actual server but are using one
>computer to be the IB/FB server. In these cases I
>do not know which computer they will be using but
>I can talk them through a browse looking for the files.

Which will be of exactly NO use at all for getting any clients connected to
the database. Why do they *need* to browse to where the db file is,
anyway? All they could do with it is delete it...

>I have one CD that sets up the server and database and
>a second CD that installs each of the clients using
>autostart.
> We are talking about people that are just getting
>used to using a mouse......

Are we talking to a developer who is just getting used to client/server
architecture? If so, I'd be willing to provide a bit of off-topic
explanation as to why it's not possible to use peer-to-peer fileserving to
connect clients to a database server. (Off-topic, as this is an
architectural issue, not an IBO one).

You have either one or two options, depending on the OS version of the
server that will host the database server *AND* the database. Neither of
those options is peer-to-peer fileserving.

If the server is likely to be anything but WinNT, Win2K or XP2003, you have
but one option....but, whatever the case, the database can not be anywhere
but on the same physical machine as the database server.

Helen