>AFAIK, they won't add any new functionality other than offering the possibility of running in .NET. They may add a couple of years to the life of VFP applications, but that won't prevent VFP from being obsolete.
>
>I'm still amazed to see developers so attached to a given tool that they won't even try to learn/use anything else. It's a little bit like a construction worker who is the master of the hammer. Everything look like a nail to him and he won't let go of his hammer for nothing. Sometime a screwdriver may be a better option to work with a screw.

Frankly, Sylvain, I'm sick and tired of hearing this kind of crap...
That's your point of view and you are most entitled to have that opinion. But, please, do not foist the "won't even try to learn/use anything else" on everyone who uses/praises VFP!

There are countless legitimate reasons why someone might bemoan the end of further development of VFP. And, yes, being FORCED to leave a perfectly serviceable computer language behind is another huge irritant for many of us!

The hammer analogy is over-used but, more importantly, inappropriate. A hammer has very limited application. Programming languages, on the other hand, are designed to permit someone to solve virtually any standard business problem that may exist. In other words, programming languages have virtually UNlimited application. Just because a very rich software company chooses to do things that "obsolete" a language (VISTA and next OSes, 64-bit with no option to run 16-bit, a 'new' (every xx years) "development platform", etc.) is no good reason to swallow the death of VFP or any other language. Microsoft has shown itself to be a poor corporate citizen and it is high time that they experienced some comeuppance for their arrogance.



>
>If you want your application to run in .NET, why don't you use a real .NET language?
>
>>It is the last version from Microsoft.
>>
>>Let's hope Guineu and etecnologia both make it. Either of them 'deserves' the name VFP10 to me.