>I'd say they are partially wrong. Assume you're comparing two portable radios - one of them has a CD player, and the other has a flashlight. You're comparing them as radios; that's the comparable part. Then you can go and compare how each benefits from the rest of the goodies they have, but you can't really compare those goodies.

Why partially wrong?

When finnish language hasn't articles (like a,an,the) or prepositions or it has inflexion that other may be missing (those would compared to flaslight/no flaslight in the radio) it is only partially language, or is it?

It is still language without those gadgets or even if students has to play CD in flaslights lamplight to get graduated in finnish language or spit over the left shoulder everytimes when genetive is used. It would be a language even if there are just on or two words like Uh and Oh. Gadgets dosen't make it as a language but the core makes it. More gadgeds the wider you can use it and after a treshold of gadgets you can even call programming language as a development environment but basicly it is programming language and it has more gadgets that some others have.

Just MHO

AT

P.S. Uh, uH oh oh Oh uh - free translation would be something like "VFP is one of the most extra gadged loaded programming language" <bg>