Hi Perry,

>Where I think Perry is coming from (I work with the guy) is that there are a lot more .NET jobs out there than VFP.

I'll not be the denying that, but what does this say? I'm not drawing the same conclusions.

>As far as .NET versus VFP apps, the only people qualified to give a sound opinion are those who have used both technologies to build database apps from the ground up. However, their honesty on the matter depends upon whether or not hidden agendas are being orchestrated.

>As for me, I can only base my opinion on my experience. What other folks SAY is not my experience. I, therefore, avoid basing my opinion on the opinions of others.

>As far as .NET goes, my experience is that I have never seen a database app in production. I have seen feeble attempts (and millions) wasted on Java database projects. I have seen lousy VFP apps in production. And i have seen great VFP / SQL Server apps in production - mine, of course >)

Well, that is more or less my experience also.

>I think one of the main problems developers have is burn-out. Contrary to what some may think, burn-out is caused by the absence of being excited about one's work which is usually caused by apathy with respect to learning something new. Some folks have chosen to take VFP to the limit. Some (guys like RickS) have exceeded those limits and have moved on. Many, however, are caught in the abyss and will remain there until it gets too painfull.

I think I'm still young enough (34) to switch languages if neccesary. But I haven't reached VFPs limits yet, nor did RickS or anybody here on the forum IMO. Of course RickS is concentrated on internet based applications. It is logical he embraced .NET. However, I don't think RickS has entirely left VFP.

>Personally, I am approaching the limits on VFP. However, SQL Server offers many cool challenges and I can keep the juices flowing leveraging it with VFP.

Well, what are the limits ? I'm using VFP with SQL/server and I simply don't see any better tool as far data processing is involved. No alternative. VFP9 takes us a step further in many aspects as certain limits disapearred. The GUI might be the weakest point and the integration of third party (activeX) controls has always been relatively troublesome. The VFP9 report writer is probably the best report writer I could imagine (I attended a full day session with Colin and lisa), though I might say I've got a huge experience in Crystal Reports as well. The GDI integration is way better in VFP9 and suprised me.

That is not to say that I don't see the cracks in the wall. If you look at the number of issue reported by Fabio and really understand what he is saying is that some things need to be fundamentally changed. Also better designtime and compiletime code checking should be implemented. However it is the question how this can be done. The VFP core engine is about 20 years old, so there are quite a few thing you'd do differently now. There are irritating problems in VFP that are difficult to track, sometimes having to do with timing, bugs, leaving you frustrated.

However what is the alternative ? now jumping the .NET boat while I really want to use LINQ, better databinding and scalability. Don't get me wrong. I'll keep my eye on .NET and see how it evolves, and make a decision when I'm conviced .NET is the best tool for the job (hmmm, where did I see this statement before :)).

I run a business and earn my money by delivering solutions, not by jumping every hype that comes along.

Walter,