I have questions and comments interspersed...

>Given its current state, is it possible for the VFP language and the VFP community to rise from the ashes and become the powerful tool and vibrant community that it once was?
>
>I keep remembering that first Fox Conference in Toledo and remembering how the Fox rose from meager beginnings to become the data powerhouse that we know and today as Visual FoxPro.
>
>I’m going to list pros and cons below and then I’ll tell you what I think. Then I’d like to know what you think:
>
>**VFP will never rise because:
>
>Microsoft has done a very good job of first starving us by not marketing VFP and in some cases actively disseminating false information about the language. And then the killed us by discontinuing support for VFP. They have poisoned the well.

Can you point to specific instances where Microsoft in Redmond disseminated false information about VFP? I'm not talking about local people, who today don't always give an accurate story on .Net or SQL Server. I want to hear of specifics from Microsoft corporate.

>
>There will be no new programmers that will want to base their careers on this dead language because of the lack of programmers, clients will not want software written in a language that cannot be maintained.
>
>Once support is gone, that’s it. You won’t be able to buy VFP any more so even tools that integrate VFP into VS won’t do us any good.

I don't agree with this. If you get an MSDN subscription today, you still get access to DOS, Windows 3.1 and other apps.

>
>All languages have their life cycles and VFP has come to its end. It must now take its place with COBOL, FORTRAN, and other languages that are now part of programming history.

There are still companies updating and selling both FORTRAN and COBOL compilers today.

>
>VFP programmers should just accept that the Fox is dead and learn a “real” language.

With dynamic languages becoming envogue, we could point out that Fox has been there for many years.

>
>**VFP will rise because:
>
>FoxPro became popular because it handled data better than any other language in the market. It still does.
>
>FoxPro became popular because it was the “Fastest Database on the planet!”. It still is.

I don't fully agree with this. Many databases have caught up and in some cases, surpassed VFP.

>
>FoxPro gained rapid popularity among both developers and clients because developers are MUCH more productive using it than when using other languages. They still are.

I think it really depends on how well you know the language and IDE. I've seen people create amazing apps in C# in a very short time.

>
>The cost of maintenance in both time and dollars was much lower in VFP because of the language. It still is.

This is conjecture. Do you have real evidence to back this up?

>
>You could add features to a VFP application literally overnight because of the productivity of the language. You still can.
>
>The community rapidly became the most caring, helpful, and vibrant communities. Although battered and bruised, the community is still great!
>
>**My opinion:
>
>The reasons that VFP has been so successful are twofold: Community and Market. You cannot tell me that if a customer is presented with the prospect of a product that costs significantly less in both time and dollars and that is robust to boot that they will pick the more expensive option. Some might but most will not. I have a friend who gets his anti-VFP customers to agree to allow him to prototype their app in VFP and when he is done they stammer a bit and then ask him why they should pay for the ‘real thing’ when the prototype is so good! That’s the market working.

I know of teams that love WPF because they say they can develop the real app at prototype speeds.

>
>All the languages that I know about that are part of programming history are there for good reason. They were a pain in the neck to use and took forever to write anything in and programs written in them were a monster to maintain. This is not true of VFP. If VFP fades into history it will be the first language that went into it’s grave for no good reason whatsoever.

People's definitions of "good reason" will vary.

>
>The community part is up to us. As VFP programmers we need to get behind the efforts that are going on trying to resurrect VFP and push with all our might! As much as I hate it we may have to change the names of these efforts to rid ourselves of the stigma that actions by Microsoft have put upon the Fox but other than this concession we should not concede even an inch of ground!
>
>Remember that most of the statements that you have heard about VFP from the .Net side are nothing but sectarian language bigotry. Sure, VB.Net has its good points and if I’m writing something that doesn’t use much data I might want to choose that but most of what I write are database apps. I choose VFP!

Are you saying that a good database app that deals with large amounts of data can't be written in .Net?

>
>Personally, I find what Samuel David and his guys are doing at eTechnologia very exciting! If you have not done so check it out. This true VFP .Net Compiler is quite impressive! Those guys are geniuses. Any of you media types out there with Podcasts and blogs, interview these guys! The job of any media is to let the community know what is going on. The community is hungry for information!
>
>Well, that’s my two cents worth…
>
>What do you think?
>
>Steve

My opinion:

VFP is still a great tool for database apps and will be for many years. But, it won't ever be what it once was.