>>In any case, VB.NET is for me something more debatable. It was supossed to be there to drive the millions VB developers to .NET but wasn't very succeful at that.
>
>I guess the mistake will not be repeated in VFP's case. Keep VFP as a pure language for a while. Give it superb interop. Add as much, all of it, into a similar language or create a new language (name atleast) in .net with all the VFP stuff (repackaged), then the transition will be very easy in 15-20 years time.

It seems they are slowly heading this way, although not over a new language, but partly in VB.Net, partly in the framework, partly in some experimental research like C Omega. You'll see more and more of the things we all love from VFP getting added to the .NET platform. But you have to keep in mind tht it will never be exactly as VFP. Mainly, I won't expect any kind of backward compatibility in the sense of been able to take a VFP app and make it run in any .NET platform with "minor" tweaks.

All in all, I think very interesting times are coming. And we are just a couple days from the big Ken announcement!

Best regards,