>The choice was to either modernize or to switch. The choice is no longer available. The manager, whether a he or a she, is forced to switch. Or are you seriously suggesting that companies should consider the option of incrementally shifting in 8 years? I tell you, that's not what will gonna be decided a lot.

What I say is that a projects that completely rewrite a complex application and then have an old-app-off -> new-app-on day are almost always a very bad decision. I know because I've been there many times. But having 8 year of product support ahead (if this is poses a deadline due to corporate standards) gives you a lot of time to start an incremental migration. If this is properly handled, it can probably get you to a new platform faster than a complete rewrite, which has a lot of validation problems.

>>Over the last two versions VFP added a lot of interoperability features to let you play with .NET, Java or most any other modern platform, so this shouldn't be a problem.
>>
>>Also, notice that you are talking about an presumably well-managed company which have a complex application still running in VFP 7, which is an obsolete product since a lot of time. That doesn't sounds smart enough.
>
>VFP7 still gets some support by MS. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=3018
>Having said that, a simple rebuild in vfp9 often suffices. Talking about modernizing. :)

That's why I'm saying an important application still running on VFP 9 doesn't make much sense.