Jim,
Thank you for the message. I still enjoy VFP a lot and I don't have anything bad to say about VFP (well unless my code doesn't behave the way I want it to<s>). Unfortunately I do not get to work with VFP too much anymore. I still tinker around with some "old" VFP programs in my spare time, but that is all it is, tinkering around. The main reason I switched to .NET was because I decided to start working for a company closer to home. Before accepting that position I had been tinkering around with .NET for about 1 year, but it was not what I did 10 hours per day. Now it is the other way around I do .NET 10 hours per day and tinker with VFP. I do not know what my future holds and I don't really care what language I am using as long as I am programming. I would accept a VFP job in the future, but for right now I enjoy this company and .NET.

Some things are really cool in VFP and some things are really cool in .NET. Some things are easy in .NET and some things are easy in VFP.

The problem in my oppinion is misconseptions, and if someone maskes an "incorrect" statement we all want to "correct" that person. Sometimes it is not easy to make corrections without offending somebody. I don't think the purpose of this thread was/is to determine which language is better, but instead to determine some key differences and allow interested developers to draw some conclusions of their own.

Thread titles like ".NET sux" or ".NET is 10 times slower than VFP" hurt .NET'ers just as much as thread titles like "VFP sux" and ".NET is 10 times better than VFP" hurt VFP'ers. And it is thred titles or comments like those that gets the sword rattling (pissin' matches) going.

I don't want to rub anyones nose in anything (even if I was a little smug earlier in this thread).

Again thank you for your message it made me think.

Sincerely,
Einar

>Einar,
>
>You've gone over to the other side BUT you don't have to be the same as the existing members of the other side.
>
>Or is talking "all hat" part of the training intrinsic to .NET?
>
>You've joined the side that had all kinds of "reasons" not to touch a simple litlle crappy useless worthless (their words) application (RIO) for over a year yet applauded RodP when he made an equivalent (I guess) between diaper changes. You don't see some irony there?
>
>You've joined the side that has argued since it came out that .NET is the greatest, yet needed to wait for 2.0 to even try to show some of its stuff. I have to wonder why. Don't you?
>
>I think most of us understand that 'you can do it in .NET, you just have to do it differently'. It's just that many of us see no advantage to not only having to do something differently, but on bigger hardware with more product dependencies.
>
>Finally, and the real point of my message here... you are quite sure that because you haven't met the app that needs lots of data munging, they don't exist except in poor imaginations of people who don't know how to design the right way anyway. I want to let you know that you are are incorrect **IF** that actually is your position.
>
>Einar, go ahead and enjoy your new .NET programming power. Just don't be like the others and rub our noses in it. We're big boys and girls and we'll move on when each of us feels the time is right for us.
>
>cheers
>