>>I too code in .net everyday and the app is actually an extremely mission critical system. I never stated that .net was not proven technology or unreliable in anyway. I actually believe quite the opposite. I was referring to John's comment on VFP and eTech's being unproven. I interpreted it wrong?
>
>To be fair to John, I took that as calling E-Tech's product unproven. I think if he was talking about straight VFP he might have used a different adjective.
That makes sense, however, how is it any different than other products that compile to IL like those here:
http://www.dotnetpowered.com/languages.aspxhttp://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10878_11-6094937.htmlor does ET not work under the same principle?
.·*´¨)
.·`TCH
(..·*
010000110101001101101000011000010111001001110000010011110111001001000010011101010111001101110100
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates
Vita contingit, Vive cum eo. (Life Happens, Live With it.)
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." -- author unknown
"De omnibus dubitandum"
