Good! because if you continue like that I'll put you on my twit list. 8->

>I am in the marketplace, too, and don't notice many people looking for VFP developers any more. Hence my low degree of interest in VFP extender technologies.
>
>OTOH I can see others are excited about eTecnologia, so I'll be quiet now and stop raining on the parade.
>
>>Hi Mike,
>>
>>The first round of developers using the VFP Dev Studio for .Net will undoubtedly be VFP developers. Beyond that is a question-mark. I think development metrics will be one factor in further adoption, if there is to be any outside of the VFP community. Comparing ADO.Net with VFP data-handling is a great comparison (I note your reference to it in another post). Microsoft has been busy creating add-ons for ADO.Net (Entity Framework; Linq-to-Entities) because by itself, ADO.Net is not coherent with .Net itself. And the problem comes down to strong typing, when you walk the cat back. VFP code using the .Net Compiler for VFP does not have that issue with which to contend.
>>
>>So, if there is a second round of developers adopting the eTecnologia product, it will be those who want a coherent, dynamic language approach to writing business applications. There is a reason that Python is one of the 3 or 4 supported languages at Yahoo, Google, Nasa, etc.: the development metrics are better than non-dynamic languages. VFP has that same advantage, and has the additional advantage of coherently and seamlessly interacting with data.
>>
>>I notice that you mention MSSQL as a backend: all our apps run on VFP or SQL Server, running the same code (with the help of various 3rd-party development tools of course). That experience will be enhanced in the .Net Compiler for VFP, based on what Samuel has noted publicly. Which is a further source of excitement, i.e., the further evolution of the VFP language.
>>
>>I don't know if development metrics will carry a second round of adopters. But it might. And for those using the VFP language (and productivity tools that already work in VFP), it will sure make them competitive in the marketplace. That's enough for me, because that's where I am.
>>
>>Hank
>>
>>
>>>>>Pertti, reviewing the user group there are hints that Etecnologia is far more ambitious than people are allowing for here. If people can forget that this is VFP and focus on what the tool actually delivers, the potential is impressive.
>>>>
>>>>Actually I agree with your idea earlier in this thread that they should not tie their product directly to VFP. Perhaps they would be better of shape it up and market it as Neo-xBase, xBase4Century21, xBase.Net / Inspired by VFP! Or something like that ;o)
>>>>
>>>>xBase is wider term, and existed before Fox and will exist after Fox. Simply there is handsom market pie dedicated to this concept, (now owned by VFP) so who ever get to it first, in acceptable way (price, compatibility,stability) will get to eat it. None of the existing players (dBase,xHarbour etc) are not there yet, so eT have great chance of claiming Lion Share of that market.
>>>>
>>>>If they choose to stick with VFP compiler idea/name then they might end up suffering pain of stigmata inflicted on VFP,
>>>>in a ridicullous effort to kill that market after claiming it almost in full with VFP5-6 back in 90-ies.
>>>>(BTW, Didn't you know you can kill market just like that, and easily create much bigger one? ... Just convince your customers that they are Fat&Ugly and they all need to shape up, and then rush them to your own shops to buy new clothes! Yeah right... That is what made Waren Buffet richest person on the planet... {g}) )
>>>>
>>>>What I need, is new full size xBASE language/product in NET, fully OOP, dynamic , 64 bit, and if possible with rich NET interfaces.
>>>>I hold pennies in my hand, and will buy from first new supermarket that opens up in the area ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>If eT become my new Wallmart, then good for them. I wish Samuel & Co every luck & success :)
>>>
>>>Do you consider xBase any less dead (to most people) than Visual FoxPro?
>>>
>>>I guess that's not the point. The product seems aimed at those who want to continue writing in FoxPro, just with a .NET target. IMO it doesn't really matter what other developers think.