>As for John's point that .Net is a moving target: I think that misses the point of the eTechnologia effort. What is built is CLS-compatibile, which means it can interoperate with any or all of .Net, without any special effort. Need to access Azure classes: no problem -- they can be accessed directly within your VFP code. So, as .Net moves, your VFP program compiled to .Net moves with it. Your access to it will be simplified, and you will be able to write VFP classes that encapsulate (wrap) this .Net functionality, so you can simplify your access to .Net functionality to what you need: that's the VFP way of things.

It depends against which runtime they are producing their code. The 3.0 runtime is different than the 3.5 runtime. Much of the new functionality is built on the 3.5 runtime. If they are compiling their code against 3.0 or 2.0 then they will lose functionality.

>
>Support from the VFP community is key. It's coming: there have been nearly 2,000 views of the little YouTube video I made of the first release of the VFP Developer Studio for .Net. The length (and energy) of this discussion is another good sign: VFP developers are taking the effort seriously, whatever they think or know about the product.


That's true, but I was one of the ones that viewed your demo. I have no intention of buying the product, I watched it merely out of curiosity. I'll bet there are a bunch of us that did that. But 2,000 developers paying 120.00 for the code will not put a dent in the "over-all cost bucket".