What more could I say. Jos and Walter gave you solid arguments. Arguments you can't deny. So now you know you should compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Don't mix and match to suit your (flawed) argumentation.

As I said before and I'll say now and say forever and ever. The tool used should be chosen depending on the job to be done.


>I occasionally poke around some of the threads here and this topic seems to be raised alot by those who still use VFP exclusively. I once used VFP exclusively - up until about four years ago. I just don't get this arguement that .NET can't do data. It is simply not true. It's a huge lie. Sure, it is different than VFP - but .NET can do data and do it efficiently with SQL Server. If you do your most intensive data crunching with SQL Stored Procs in a well designed database - in many cases it can be faster than VFP...
>
>
>
>>>Perhaps you did'nt explained the point well enough :-D
>>>
>>>LOL! I think the content of the link sort of speaks for itself....
>>
>>Kevin, Kevin, Kevin,
>>
>>There seems to be some frustrations left. The sad thing is that we'll never know what it is exactly.
>>
>>Perhaps it's because even if you're an MVP and makes tons of money with VS.net and C# you can't get over the fact that it'll take a while (perhaps many years in fact) before you're able to process data as easily as you did with VFP.
>>
>>Perhaps it's because you still see many others who are able to make a nice living working exclusively with VFP. Should'nt they have to suffer like you to process that data <g>.
>>
>>Perhaps I put my finger exactly where it hurts. Perhaps there's something else.
>>
>>Anyway I'll take myself as an example. When I don't care about something I don't speak about it. Why waste time on something meaningless to me. To you VFP should'nt be used no more in any circumstances. Still you continue to bash it. What's your beef? Should'nt you forget about VFP and go on with your life.
>>
>>I really think that there's still a wound that needs to be healed.