Yes, I read the link. I didn't see anything in there that would lead me to understand what you apparently inferred from what was said. I think you should read the article again, with a different set of eyes.

>Well as a professional programmer etc etc...
>
>Did you ever have a video recorder? Most of them had fairly cool timing and scheduling features to allow you to record programs etc in your absence. However, research showed that many/most people left their machines with "12:00" flashing on the display and never used the timing features.
>
>Why didn't people use those features? Surely the features have value? Was it too difficult or was there some other reason?
>
>This is the logic people are trying to apply to change tracking in NET. We're scolded repeatedly that there are change tracking features (which was said from the very start) but none of the NET locals seems to use them. Surely the features have value. So why aren't they being used? Saying over and over that they do exist is not an answer.
>
>Certain people choose to interpret this as a worthless question, or an attempt to disparage. Surely they're not expecting their fellow professional developers to simply copy what others are doing without any attempt to think about it? That's not really compatible with the "professional" label, is it?
>
>Finally, did you read the link provided by Craig B in which Anders H describes the future he envisages for data in NET? Do you think he is advocating use of SP to do all processing at the server? Does he mention FP at all? What do you think of what he is saying?