A lot of the problems in Java are the result of Sun not upgrading the language in a timely enough manor. Many in the Java community are happy about Microsoft. Not because they like anything about MS, but because dotnet is forcing them to be better about enhancing the language.

I'm not sure if Sun is abdicating the desktop to dotnet thou. But they really haven't done much to the Java/Swing API in quite sometime. There are several blogs/posts that I've found in the last couple months asking if Swing is dead.

>Yeah, the quality of the VFP apps (particularly the one you inherited) left a lot to be desired. You deserve a lot of credit for getting it stable.
>
>However, don't dismiss the lagging technology with respect to how Java handles data for database apps. Data handling in Java didn't reach critical mass until a few years ago. See here: http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/search/searchResults.jsp?source=google&searchType=1&searchSite=dW&searchScope=dW&query=java+data+handling+classes
>
>The complexity of this type of lower-level code is astounding for the VFP community who are spoiled and probably take for granted the simplicity of issuing a simple TABLEUPDATE().
>
>Maybe we are not "real" programmers after all :) But our projects don't cost tens of millions.
>
>
>>I think very little of the problems encountered have to do with technology constraints.
>>
>>And pretty much 100% of the problems have to do with not putting the proper team in place to do the initial development. I've spoken to some of the Java guys who were there in the beginning who do know their stuff. They made comments about poor design and were not only ignored, but pushed aside.
>>
>>The apps are moving along now. And this has to do with having the proper teams in place (for the most part). There are still some things that don't move quite as quickly as they should.
>>
>>But all in all, there is basically no difference in the initial releases of the Java apps and what happened with the initial releases of the Foxpro apps. You know as well as I, that the initial teams doing the VFP work were poorly qualified, just as they were with the initial Java development.
>>
>>
>>
>>>What you are saying is true.
>>>
>>>During the last fours years, I have witnessed two enterprise level java projects which were slated to replace two legacy FoxPro apps. Over that period, both projects cost the client millions - not just one or two, but tens of millions. Both applications are in production today, but for the most part, are pieces of junk for the follwing reasons:
>>>
>>>[1] Most of the Java guys didn't have a clear understanding of data concepts. The ones that did were too busy "defining the sandwich"
>>>[2] Technology contraints.
>>>
>>>Perry, if you are reading this, is there anything you want to add?
>>>
>>>
>>>>Exactly... The more puzzling is why the programming community has been ignoring this for so long. Of course we as VFP developers knew, but until recently, and even today, there are whole vocal .NET (but outside of this forum of course also JAVA) tribes up here who deny this. I can only guess it is denial or total desinterest, or truly not understanding this.
>>>>
>>>>Walter,