>>>>We have a 3 man team ( used to be 4 ) and the company thought they'd bring in 5 ( 2 of which were C# guru's ) new folks and re-write the whole thing in .net in 1 year while we kept the revenue string alive and basically got screwed and eventually phased out. We told them to plan on 2 years minimum so we were moved out of an actual coding position to a "consulting" status.
>>>>
>>>>The new young guns made it very clear they were not interested in listening to us so we were removed from project all together.
>>>>
>>>>After 14 months and lots of cash the project was 20% complete with nothing but mocked up UI forms and crappy data integration. That team is gone and the original 3 guys are back taking the iterative process of switching to Sql over a year, then after that moving UI and middle to .Net over 18 months.
>>>>
>>>>I held my tongue and prepared my resume. When the other project was scrapped I went to a couple of the young guns and smuggly whispered don't screw with seasoned problems solvers they beat code slingers everyday.
>>>
>>>
>>>No way the two were GURUS... Any seasoned .net programmer can convert a vfp project on an equal time frame as it took to develop the original.
>>
>>I'm amazed that you can say so so smugly when you have no idea whatsoever about the application involved.
>
>Fine, but I can make that statement almost blind with the description provided by mike. I know of 3 .net gurus right now that could do what he want's nearly single handedly. These are the guys that fortune 500's are hiring to consult on conversions. I'm betting that Markus Egger, Rick Strahl, Rod Paddock and JVP could team up and knock that project out in a fraction of the above stated timeframe and deliver it under budget. I guess my definition of Guru differs from Mike's.


I'm only impressed with RickS for his web based work... The others... well.... not really.