Hi Robert
A follow up on the issues you mentioned that I didnt address yet...

>> The thing I like most about VFP is it is very backward compatible, I can >>run foxbase code in VFP9 (for the most part) unaltered. I have heard this >>is not the case in .NET.

the newest version of .NET refactored some classes so code required a minor set of changes.. The classes mentioned were marked as legacy and the compiler recommended a change to another class. They didnt break code. We converted some very large apps to 2005 with little effort. As a matter of fact I converted www.foxforum.com to 2005 in a matter of around 4 hours (I rearchtected some stuff I didn't like otherwise it wold have probably taken just a 1/2 hour or so.

>>2) Another thing I like is being able to do (&) macro substitutions in >>VFP, what is the support for this in .NET??
Rick has a number of useful classes and papers in .NET that discuss creating and executing dynamic code so it can be done.

>>3) You list the storage of data in memory objects as unique to .NET, VFP >>can handle data as objects or arrays.
Agreed... But one caveat... If these are pure fox objects doesnt that diminish the capabilities you get with the DBF??? The .NET dataset objects has a number of features built in that would take a large effort for a VFP developer to re-create. I am sure these will come out in the discussion.

THanks
Rodman