PMFJI, but I have been a die hard xbase/VFPer for over 20 years. I love VFP.

When I search Dice.com for 'FoxPro' in a 75 mile radius around my house, I find one or two jobs. I currently
drive 180 miles a day to work because I cannot find VFP work close to home. So, I have begun working in C#. Why?
Because when I search Dice.com for 'C#' in a 75 mile radius around my house, I find over 150 jobs.

The reality is that VFP is in the past. No one wants to base their business software on a language that is perceived as dead and won't be supported.




>Mike,
>
>>>I don't think he did say VFP is inadequate. Technology
>>>is not and never has been the issue. Market perception
>>>is the issue. The market perceives FoxPro as a dead
>>>product. You seem to be in denial about that.
>
>Believe me when I say that I am defiantly not in denial. I have been working with xBased languages for over 23 years now and have been working with C, C++, MASM, FORTRAN, VB, VB.Net and a handful of other languages all along the way so with me, change isn't the issue either. I agree that VFP is viewed as a dead language by the market and perhaps you are right that may be Craig's issue as well. I doubt it though. I'm guessing that he believes that the .Net languages are superior to VFP. The thing that sticks in my craw is that I don't see anything wrong with VFP as a language and it irks me that I have one less tool to work with now and for no reason.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Steve