>OTOH I feel that decoupling being somehow essential is a bit of a myth. Whats the supposed benefit for most business. For small and medium sized its irrelevant.
>
>Rubbish. This is an irresponsible statement.
>
>Where do you think many "large-scale" applications come from? Often times they begin as comparatively smaller applications, and then the company/application grows, acquires another company (or gets acquired).
>
>The development practices when applications grow will have an impact on development costs down the road. It's not the early 1990's any longer - development costs are analyzed, now more than ever, by the very businesses whom Fox people state they want to "build the best business solution for". Well, this becomes a relevant topic, not an irrelevant one as you claim. If done properly, it's the difference between being able to leverage existing code, or just scrapping and starting over.
>
>Your type of thinking is one of the reasons that Foxpro/Fox developers are perceived (fairly or unfairly) by some as hackers and hobbyists who work on one-man projects and don't consider scalability.

An overreaction Kevin

And I think a contribution showing an attitude that destroyed foxpros market.

By making a product that amateurs wouldn't be able to use "out of the box" and the "professionals " like yourself making it quite clear that anything that wasn't developed in the "right way" was rubbish the way was left clear for Access to hoover up all that small scale development work and the larger developments went down the Sql Server / orcale etc route.

I have an open mind (I think) I just don't think the same approach fits everything where you do.

Perhaps you new found training flexibility isn't quite as deep as you think.