I think the real issue is programmer experience. Due to the nature of VFP, you could build a little app quickly with VFP out of the box. I think dotnet works best when you have some dll's with classlibs to make day-to-day tasks easier.

i ran into an old collegue at a dotnet user group meeting Monday. He's got his own little company now. He was very pleased that he's hired a guy who build a dotnet framework using principles from Rocky Lhotta (sp?) business object philosophy. He's extremely happy with the quality of apps they are able to build.

>The primary benefit of VFP (still) is the data munging and the development speed. I can knock out a well designed data crunching app in 1/3 the time it would take to do it with dotnet. Even faster when you take into consideration universal classes designed earlier that are easily transported. Part of that is the capabilities of VFP and part of that is due to programmer experience (which in time dotnet development will benefit from also). The day may come though when dotnet catches up and then it will serve both the data and the internet world won't it?
>
>
>>It kind of causes you to put a lot less weight on his statements, doesn't it? I hear VFP folks saying they really enjoy working with dotnet overall. But would be really, really happy if the data handling in dotnet was easier.
>>
>>So I see Linq serving a two-fold purpose. First and foremost, it will provide a big leg up on Java. Second, it's an evolution of the product. I don't see it as any admonition of failure.
>>
>>>Walter, Walter, Walter. I really cannot believe you made this statement.
>>>
>>>SNIP
>>>>JVP really did not understand the value of the database engine. He simply had no clue what he was talking about. Time has proven he was wrong. Microsoft now is admitting the importance of deep data integration and why it needs to be in there, thanks to the VFP - team.