>For those who have VFP 6.0 beta copy, please comment on the following to clarify things:
>
>LAN Times review on VFP 6.0
>1. "VFP 6.0 is sluggish still; RDBMS connection could be simpler."
>
>I am an Asian folk, but what I understand with "SLUGGISH" is SLOW.

Everything is relative. Compared to VFP 5, it's not sluggish. It also depends on what you're measuring. If you're comparing say between VFP 6 and VB 6, the data access and manipulation in VFP is faster, if not an order of magnitude easier. If you're talking about internals, and in particular screen updates, then VB blows VFP away.

I have VB and VFP...I'll take VFP for any application that requires data access (which is almost all of them for me).

>2. "The nature of the programming language is still procedural, but the new version has improved object capabilities and includes a library of objects, such as navigation buttons and other Windows controls, that you can drag and drop in your application."
>
>I just want to emphasize with the term "PROCEDURAL". As far as I know, VFP supports procedural still but not promoting procedural programming because the nature of the language is already full object-oriented programming.
>
>3. "New applications-development projects should take advantage of contemporary programming tools, so we won't try to persuade you to adopt the dated Visual FoxPro as your main programming language. But if you have existing FoxPro investments or fluent FoxPro developers on staff, mark your calendar for the release later this summer and begin pushing those old programs toward the new century."
>
>This claim is ridiculous, it scares new comers because it does not promote VFP as a good choice for new projects but only to existing FOXPRO investments and only current FOXPRO community.
>
>Please comment, and if I have a wrong perception, I stand to be corrected...

I agree with you. The same thing could be said of C++.

In short, never trust LAN guys to make programming decisions. :)

Christopher