Kevin,

This is a very insightfull post. As I increase my attendance at .net events, msdn, classes, etc., I'm still waiting for someone to standup and say that they just wish .net would do data better.

I have friends doing .net quite successfully. I've mentioned the thought process behind Linq, to enhance data capabilities in .Net and bring in some VFP features. This comment has been met with a big yawn.

Someone here even mentioned that developers choose tools that they feel comfortable with and offer them the capabilities they need. But all I've heard was excuses here why so many have chosen .net as their platform of choice.

No one was willing to offer me a reasonable explanation about my interviewing experience over the last 2 months. In 100% of the cases where I felt the candidate was extremely strong from a technical point of view, they are now doing .net work. Almost exclusively.

And not once did they say that they didn't like working with .net for any reason. The only reason they still did VFP work was if a VFP job presented itself to them and they were too lazy at the time to find another .net gig.

PF



>It can take 1-2 years to truly understand what can be done with the language, the framework, ADO.NET, stored procedures, etc. I will fully acknowledge that it's not always easy, that sometimes it takes some "elbow grease" - however, in several instances, "digging deep" for a functional counterpart to handle local data or some other task has revealed other strong aspects of the .NET framework that I might not otherwise have discovered. One is not likely to gain a deeper understanding of the technology while taking a superficial approach.
>
>I've presented at MSDN CodeCamps this year, and have spoken with MANY people who are developing different types of database applications: client-server, web, and even desktop applications. They're not complaining about lack of capabilities. As I've said many times, the "myths" and "half-truths" perpetuated on this forum are rooted in a psychology that is excessively tied to the "fox" way of doing things. One of these days I'd like to challenge someone to venture away from the friendly confines of the UT and post their theories on .NET on a .NET forum: I think that would be very interesting indeed. Some of the most negative statements I've read about .NET come from this forum, and in many instances from those with little or limited .NET experience.
>
>As for your last point...I've answered over 100 .NET questions on this forum in the last year or so, and have even done some troubleshooting with files sent by different members. Yes, clients want honesty and they want to know when something truly cannot be done - and in many cases, they want someone with skills to make things happen, and experience to understand the difference between a perceived limitation and an actual one.
>
>For instance, last year I published an article on techniques with the .NET datagrid - some were intended to demonstrate comparable functionality with the VFP datagrid, including a functional equivalent of a generic DynamicForeColor. I later received emails from people who said they'd given up on the .NET datagrid until they saw my article.
>
>I've contributed a substantial amount of information to the community about doing "fox" things in .NET, and will always do everything I can to help people - but I have to be honest that I have increasingly low tolerance for hasty conclusions.
>
>My twin-copper Lincolns.
>
>Kevin