Well, since .NET development takes months and several programmers, I had better stop reading this and get to work!!!

Seriously, where did you read that/who did you hear that from?


>>>You made ignorant and unfair statement about platform you DO know.
>>>Why is that ?
>>>VFP might be 'xbase relic' to you since you use NET, but that is far far away from truth. You could say that for DOS versions, but not for whole VFP.
>>
>>How is that an ignorant statement. An ignorant statement is one where the truth is overlooked or not based in fact. BTW, I've said this hundreds of times and it still fails to impant on the minds of people here. I STILL USE VFP TO THIS DAY. I'm not totally into .Net. I should be in a year or so.
>>
>>My statement that x-base is a relic is one based on both truth and fact. There is no new definition or forward movement in the language. It is not actively being devleloped for developmental purposes. There is a declining user base and a declining use among major business as well as an increase in lack of knowledge that it even exists. Go to any developer's conference and take a poll on how many have ever used foxpro; or even more important, how many still use it. If it were so cutting edge and in demand, you think Microsoft would have stopped developing it? When was the last book published by a major publishing house on VFP? (I'm not counting Hentzenwerke here, they are not a major publisher.) When was the last major conference that had more than few hundred in attendance rather than the 1000's during the 90's. You can say all you want, but the evidence is clear. Take a poll here on the UT. Ask how many have upgraded and are using vfp 9.o and Sedna. If the respondents
>>answered truthfully, I bet you'd be surprised at the lack of support here, in all places, for the very product that they assiduously defend.
>
>Oh & Uh ...
>If this is the way you look at it then VFP has been 'relic' for some years
>now. That did not stop people and companies from using it.
>Only real problem for VFP is political rather then technical and that is this year fatal announcement by MS.
>That is real blow to the VFP as product but moreover to professional developers who are still using it.
>If I undertake any consultancy from now on I will have to inform my client about status of language used and proceed only if he agrees upon.
>
>It is matter of (my) etics and honesty.
>
>Now let's go between 5-6 months and 3-4 years back (before announcement blow) and talk about ignorance and etics.
>
>You undertake tailor made project for SME client which requires lot of data manipulation, interaction with user, complex reporting and that kind of things (Let say tailor made sales & accounting app).
>
>You would naturally advice/offer that client (or boss) your cutting edge NET aproach and then gainfully employ your team of say 10 NET developers. Then you will inform him as well that he will need to purchase MSSQL server, renew his hardware to fit the NET specs and project would take off.
>
>You know your NET costs so I don't have to speculate how much this would cost your client or shareholders. (especially 2-3 years back) .
>
>Now did you bother informing that very client (or shareholders) back then, that exactly the same solution can be done at fraction of total cost and perform exactly the same thing if not better, if done with less known development platform called VFP which is on admitedly on decline but still performing great.
>
>If you did not, then I would not think highly of you in terms of etics
>and professional honesty. You would be billing your own ignorance (and possibly greed) right on top of your client or shareholders budget.
>
>I really wander how meny mixed NET&VFP shops folowed this simple etics principle (offering both options) when you have in mind amount of billable hours that each platform requires.
>
>As for your amusing 3rd world pun;
>I don't develop for market. I am not paid to make money by selling software but to save costs implementing software solutions. There4 cost ratio is all that matters. In this respect and despite all the bad that happen to VFP, it is still great choice/platform for our bussiness.
>
>Call us 3rd world or ignorant, but here we simply choose not to spend few million bucks on each project and we developed quiet a bit of those under stringent deadlines and preassure. If all I had back in 2001 was NET, company would be probably still running most of business under old Unix apps while I would be bigger IT chief (just like you are) leading dev team of 5-7 people still choking to do all the job that was to be done and maintain it afterwards.
>Instead I have done it basically all by myself, using few junior assistants at pick times. Count it by any measures you like but that is just fraction of
>cost comparing to any NET based alternative. If I ordered set of
>apps that were created, on US hour rates it would probably cost us between 20 to 30 million USD if not more.
>
>So now we should throw all that in garbage, and spend it all over again
>rebuildng all this in NET so I can be NET usergroup star/attendee entitled to free pizza ??? I don't think so.
>In 3rd world we prefer to fry Fox for breakfast instead :)
>
>
>
>
>
>>I'm sorry for VFP, but I think you'll be safe. Third world countries will have to use it for data driven apps for the foreseeable future. It runs on less stringent hardware requirements and is easy enough to learn that anybody can program in it and deliver apps. They won't have to bother exercising their brain matter learning a system that is vast, complex and cutting edge.