Hi Kevin,
>What surprises me is that so many posts on LINQ are database related (LINQ to SQL), as opposed to LINQ queries of in-memory collections (LINQ to Objects), or XML questions (LINQ to XML). LINQ adds so much more to in-memory collection queries and XML queries or generation than it does to database queries. Sure, performing LINQ queries on a SQL Server database is nice, but I already have a SQL-like method of getting data from the database. It's called SQL. <s>
>
The "old" way of Ado.Net data handling (not talking performance here) was IMHO lacking as it forced a different method of data access for the data inside compared to getting it from the disk. I still think vfp's elegant way of providing cursors to be queried by the same SQL is miles ahead of the Ado.Net2.0 *ideas*.

With the "unified query concept" LINQ will introduce .Net leaps ahead of vfp in that area - which IS important to developers, especially if you have to take over somebody elses code.

>To me, this is far cooler than the LINQ to SQL stuff.

Agreed. Probably even worth the syntax changes, which currently look "unnatural" and only intellisense alone would not have interested me that much - we had SQL. But will other backends / DBA's support this or will it create a different split ? Interesting times, for sure.

regards

thomas