Hi Craig and all

>No one has ever said it was impossible to have a VFP.Net...it's not a good idea because you lose much of what makes Fox what it is.

COBOL.net is also not a good idea because we'll lose much of what makes COBOL what it is.

Ain't COBOL and VFP cousins, both are data intensive languages made for data. VB (whatever it's incarnation), C (ditto), Java (ditto) are not.

Then why reinvent the wheel and make languages that are not data intensive to become data intensive. And who is giving data muscles to these languages, the VFP core developers.

The whole programmer (not just VFP) community is being taken for a (marketing) ride and the best part is we are riding it.