However, what I do know of it is that it is aiming for VFP9 compatability in the .NET world.

The goal is to compile 4GL apps to NET IL or binary x86/x64. The 4GL happens to be VFP. Of course that matters but it's not a necessity for all the benefit eT seems close to offering.

NOLOH brings me many benefits that couldn't be had using other, more mainstream web technologies.

Precisely. Just as NOLOH generates Web2/ajax that is basically indistinguishable from what you would achieve by other means, the eT compiler delivers IL that is basically indistinguishable from what you could generate using C#. In fact you could disassemble to C# and it should compile again to IL. You're delivering 100% NET product. Just as you're delivering PHP with NOLOH.

no-one used Fox and therefore no-one wanted a Fox developer, irrespective of how experienced I was.

Sure. But the eT compiler has nothing to do with being a VFP developer apart from the head start. You're a NET developer. You can deliver NET apps that run quickly and will work for Silverlight or Webforms or whatever. The assemblies you generate can be used by other developers same as any other NET assembly. As new technology appears you deliver upgrades to utilize the new technology by recompiling. Where is the victim?

Of course I understand why people disappointed at VFP prospects and forced to make a change may be leery about tying their pendant to the VFP mast again. But you're not. You're declaring yourself as a NET developer with a mighty productivity tool. If you insist you can deliver C# to the customer for the work you produce if there is any doubt about its NET status. It's all NET and you're a legend in the productivity stakes. Again, where is the victim?

AFAICS NOLOH will turn out to be an excellent choice. As you note, probably they're further along than eT. But there's a new eT version about to release: stick around and see what eT customers think of it.