>>>>>Whatever. Mike ended his comments in a way I expect from him, so perhaps it shouldn't piss me off. He's come across to me - over time - as a drinker of the M$ Koolaid and a person who has a high opinion of himself and is quite willing to belittle others. So "stick it" was what he got and what he deserved.
>>>>
>>>>Did I steal your girlfriend at some point in time?
>>>>
>>>>I would like you to back up your comments about me, or admit that you're angry and spewing irrational comments. I would like to see proof that:
>>>>
>>>>-Over time I am a drinker for the MS Koolaid
>>>>-That I have a high opinion of myself
>>>>-I am quite willing to belittle others
>>>
>>>Trying to prove opinions is mostly pointless. I will note that you responded to a message not directed at you and ended it with an insult to me. People will agree with some/all of what I said or they won't. It's not up to me, it's up to you.
>>
>>It wasn't an insult. It was a fact. You had no idea what you were talking about. That needed to be pointed out. Sorry if it hurt your feelings, but it was the truth.
>
>What I said was:
>
>They change things that break code . . .
>
>I've shown that in a previous reply.
>
>They go off in different directions . . .
>
>Development techniques and recommendations have come and gone in .NET
>
>They put forth new data acess techniques . . .
>
>You did not dispute that.
>
>And eventually they will get rid of .NET completely and we'll have to rewrite everything again . . .
>
>Purely an opinion, but not one that is indefensible, given their history.
>
>So, to all of this you responded "You have no clue what you are talking about." You took it to a personal level and your statement can't even be backed up. These are facts and opinions and there are shades of gray. I wish I had more time to discuss this - I really should be coding - but when I do take the time, I'm hoping for discussion without insults.

MS's track record is they are always looking for the next best thing and they want everyone to abandon what they've done and start from scratch. They did it with VB and they are doing it with VFP.

Why anyone would want to give them the chance to do it again is beyond me. There are things I can do with VFP that I could never do with .NET; and after investing so many years learning it, why should I start over with .NET just because MS says it's what I should use.

I sure and the heck won't invest years of development time trying to convert apps that are working perfectly just so I can say they are written in .NET. In some circles, that would be a negative.