>>I suppose that's right, but don't you also need to know how to write VFP programs?
>>
>>But what are you comparing that with? A useful comparison might be:
>>
>>1) A newbie creates a VFP form, adds a Remote View to its datasource, adds dataaware controls, downloads samples from UT or wherever to add navigation/search features, then selects "compile to NET" in their design interface and ends up with an assembly that uses Silverlight and the EF. Then the developer steps through it in the debugger, adding functionality including error trapping- again based on tried-and-tested best practices documented over the last decade. They recompile for WPF and decide to use the WPF version.
>>
>>2) A newbie developer starts experimenting with EF, Silverlight and WPF. There aren't many samples online for Silverlight 2 because it is so new. They end up developing a Winform using typed datasets and Stored Procedures since most of the current online advice/examples support that decision. To use the EF will require a rewrite. To use silverlight will require a rewrite.
>>
>>The key advantage I see is the one most often assigned to a 4GL: it encapsulates the complexity. Why not? For me it's like an automatic gearbox: I suppose I have more control with a manual box, but the cars are so much more sophisticated and smart these days and automatic boxes so capable that I'm almost certainly better off with an auto. If some people think that makes me a wimp or not prepared to learn to use a manual properly to extract all its value, I can live with that.
>
>I think somewhere along the line you got the idea that I was disagreeing that this is a useful product. I'm not. That's why I bought it. All I'm saying is that if there is a fly in the ointment, it's that the market may be smaller than they might hope.

I think you've hit on a key point in the "will eT succeed" question. I don't question the technical aspect - I'm not qualified to do so and people whom I respect tell me they'll get there. But by the time it is completely viable - and by that I mean less than top level developers will find sufficient documentation or training to use it to its fullest - how many licenses will it sell (and how many will use it somehow unlicensed - i.e. The Chinese License covering every developer in China, Hongkong and Taiwan. ) I think it will be most useful in wrapping Foxpro apps - or parts of Foxpro apps - to work with and derive their interface entirely from the .NET world (I can't imagine using VFP interface, reporting etc if I had anything else seemlessly available)

I bought it, and I'm sure at some point I'll use it for something. But I think when it's fiinished the price or licensing model is going to have to go way up, unless the developers are independently wealthy and don't much care or they plan to make their money on consulting for major projects that use it (which might be a viable approach). Of course, anybody with the technical chops to pull this off to begin with can always make a living <g>.