>First,
>There are many Foxers who do SQL and N-Tier and disconnected data and XML, as there are many VB'rs that don't.

Agreed, I didn't say that there weren't - I put myself squarely in that category when I develop VFP apps.

>The point is with VFP, you don't need to learn 20 technologies to make it work. You can do that stuff if you want/need to but if there are other ways also.

Yes, that's it's stength - it's also it's weakness too. When I was interviewing for VFP developers a couple of years back, the number of them who didn't have a clue how to use VFP against SQL server was frightening (it was for a VFP/SQL system). The number who had never used any other reporting system than the Fox report writer was frightening. Outside of the Fox Box, they simply floundered. This is what I found generally.

>I agree it would be difficult to learn what you need to learn to be marginally proficient in .Net in a year. Is that an argument for .Net?

You will not use a new tool because it takes time to learn it? Is that what you are saying? My main point to the OP was that he wasn't really being fair to himself by giving up and returning to VFP after only looking at .NET for three months.

The fact that a novice can make something happen in VFP in much less time is commensurate with the number of really bad VFP applications that are out there that have given VFP (and other XBase tools) such a bad rap in the first place.