>Gary,
>Spot on.

I second that -- good summary. If you want to be "highly hireable", C# or VB.NET is definitely the language to stick with. Vertical app developers looking to rewrite their existing VFP applications might do well to look at something like ET or maybe Guineau (assuming they will eventually work without any major hitches.)


>
>>What you have said above is all well and good. The weaknesses I can see are as follows:-
>>
>>The Developer:
>>If the VFP developer decides to put off the decision to learn a more mainstream .NET language (like C# or VB), they are committing to eT. They now declare themselves a .NET developer - happy days! They need a job and there are plenty of those for .NET developers. They go for the interview and are asked about their C# or VB.Net experience. The eT/VFP.Net developer says "I am a .NET developer; it doesn't matter what language you use to generate IL!". The interviewer calmly advises the eT/VFP.Net developer that they have 1,000,000 lines of C# code in their organisation and shows the eT/VFP.Net developer the door.
>>
>>The Customer:
>>A customer requires a system to be developed that uses latest technology. He understands anecdotaly that .NET is "the way to go". So, he gets quotes off a number of developers for his new system and the "legend in the productivity stakes" (the eT/VFP.Net developer) wins hands down in terms of his tender and gets the job. The system works as expected, no problems with the job. Six months later, the customer wants some changes to his system and tries to contact his eT/VFP.Net developer. Unfortunately, he is no longer in business, or has moved to another country. That's a shame but no problem, thinks the customer; "I have a .NET system and there are plenty of .NET developers around - after all, remember how many .NET developers tendered to develop my system in the first place". So, he gets a bunch of .NET developers to quote for altering his .NET system. They all ask to see the source code - "is it written in VB.Net or C#" they ask? "Hmmm, isn't it just .NET" says the customer? So, the jobbing .NET devs all look at the source code left by the eT/VFP.Net developer. "What the hell is that! I haven't seen anything like that before, looks like dBase or some such". All of the jobbing .NET devs decline the work because despite the bona-fide IL, they can't or don't want to try to work out the syntax of the source code, particularly not for the money on offer from the customer who is used to paying the lower rate required by the "productivity legend". So, the customer is left with a system that virtually no other .NET developer can or wants to understand because most .NET devs that are available do C# or VB.Net.