Microsoft is not putting VFP to bed. 90% of the market does not need a SQL or web push solution.

Microsoft aint what it used to be - VFP is every where - and M$ could only wish that suckers on this board get dumbed down enough to sell SQL backends where they are not needed and bumble through trying to deliver the same functionality the market as come to expect from a well designed VFP solution with NOT of C#.

Become a programmer - not a "tool" coder. 90% of the market doesn't not care about brands - they care about what they are paying us (not microsoft) to - deliver value.

Go where you feel comfortable. If you have checked the RIO / RIONet comparison - you will see two things (1) That NET cannot deliver the same functionality as VFP or (2) that NET developers have not advanced thier skills to the level where they can compete with VFP projects, both on feature and cost.

It's not just the tool - it's the cost associated over the lifetime of use that customers are interested in. SQL is expensive - NET guys cannot yet estimate how long it will take (or cost) to deliver a project.

You are worrying about getting a sunburn from the moon when you say things like MS is putting VFP to sleep.

Let MS do it - and then they can watch the developer community in the US move to something else while they concentrate on supporting low quality off-shore outsourced projects and setting up research centers over seas.

Microsoft does not care about you - you should care what their plans are - their stock has tanked - they make game boxes - they have lost focus - their mission changes from day to day.

There are plenty of options should MS care to allow this pretense go to the point where they "drop" VFP. It will never happen - but if it did - the community will look elsewhere for tools to (and there are a lot of DBF tools out there) to service the 90% of the market that ain't going to buy NET or SQL or Projects from India and China.


>Now that it is very clear the Microsoft are gradually putting VFP to bed, I wonder what new product will emerge and take it's place?
>Surely we are not going to be left with only 2 alternatives - Microsoft Access or SQL Server.
>There is definitely a market for a "middle of the road" product like VFP that is ideal for applications that:
>
> (a) Do not need something as powerful as SQL server
> (b) Are easy to deploy and have their own database engine
> (c) That are also more powerful and faster than MS Access
>
>In the past this market was taken up by products like VFP, Paradox, Powerbuilder, FileMaker etc.
>Since Microsoft does not believe that there is market for such a product anymore, are there any third party developers thinking on what will be a good replacement for VFP?