>Sorry but your response shows an absolute, total, lack of understanding of reality.

Really ?

>I know you don't like to let reality interfere with your little happy place, but let's just try:

>First, Jr's comment is a supposition on his part. Second, and this one kind of relates to the first part, a large percentage of people have moved on from Vfp in the last 10 yrs or so. I know for certain that at any dotnet event I've been to, if VFP is mentioned there's several people there who acknowledge they have programmed in VFP. And never have they mentioned that
>they miss any part of VFP.

Hence JRs comment: They used VFP like VB, not really using the strenghts of VFP

>And as I mentioned before, when I've conducted interviews in the last 3 yrs or so, every resume I saw, and I mean everyone, that described a very competent VFP programmer, some one who worked on some sophisticated apps, also listed some experience with dotnet. Also, in every case, the interviewee was only covering their bases, accepting a VFP interview because they weren't sure at the time that a dotnet opportunity would come up. Never in an interview have I heard a candidate saying he wished he was still programming in VFP cause he didn't like dotnet.

And... if I was to be interviewed, I would not mention that too. Why on earth would I do that. I'd only point out the strengths and weaknesses of both tools.

>I find your comments extremely myopic. VFP as a vuable tool is done, dead, put a fork in it. How many yrs ago was it that Jim Duffy stated on this site that 100% of the students at his training sessions were there to learn VFP so they could do maintenance on an existing app. No new work.

Funny, This summer I send an employee to Jim duffy to learn VFP to actively develop in VFP. Two years ago one to steven black. We are now taking smart guys with a strong feeling for algoritms and let them learn VFP. This is a good alternative to finding VFP talent. BTW, the last year or so, we were able to hire two seasoned VFP developpers, very well known on this forum. We never had a problem in finding skilled VFP developpers, but hey we accept applications from all over the world.

So, that is totally your opinion. .NET does not offer easy solution to particular types of data centric solutions. Let me sum up:
- No real equivalent to the local database engine
- No real easy way to EXECSRIPT()
- No real easy way to store meta data as part of your executable
- Clumsy way of dealing with late bound COM objects
- No real comfortable way to be resource conservative (Citrix and TS solutions) when your apps is working a lot with significant amounts of local data (cursors)

Again, if your not using those features, you'll not miss it. Hence Johns comment. You don't know what you don't know.

>Somehow hundreds, if not thousands of developers have moved on. I'm glad for you that you ego has you believe that you are a far superior developer to all those who've moved on. But I've met quite a few people like you before. I remember back in the early days working with guys who refused to work with Windows, they loved DOS so much, or guys who never thought VFP would catch on, that Foxpro Windows/DOS was so much better.

Sure people have to move on to whatever tool provides them with an income and or intellectual challenge. However I've got the opinion that MS did a fairly poor job on .NET in regards of taking the strengths of a meta data driven development platform (Not only VFP, but even more so for Navision). .NET certainly has strenghts, but also weaknesses as mentioned above. If they are not relevant to you.... fine.... good for you.. However I've been making a good living out of taking the strengths of VFP and I'm not willing to give up those features just for the sake of jumping onto something just because that is 'cutting edge' still a platform in developement.

If you look at the pure technical aspects, there IMO is no compelling reason to jump .NET. I don't need multi threading, I don't need to write ASP applications. I need to deliver data intensive applications to my customers and I don't see any reason why I should do that in .NET. I'd rather see what the DLR and/or ethnologica brings rather than living with the limitations that .NET currently offers. I'd rather listen to guys like Christof, RickS, Steven Black what they have to say on the topic, than blindly jump ship because others do so. I'm not a sheep.

BTW, I don't believe for a moment that VFP won't run on any MS OS in the near future. There is too much 32bit inheritance in IT world.

Walter,