>Why should that stop MS from coming up with a different way of doing things?
>
>My girlfriend drives a car that is over 30 years old. The model is no longer made, but the car runs and parts are still available for it. Would a new car look better? Yes. Would a new car provide more functionality than her car provides? Yes. Would it be more efficient under the hood? Yes. Would it provide her with more functionality? No. She drives her car to the light rail station and back home. Occassionally she'll drive it to the store.
>
>MS has not said, "you can no longer use VFP, VB6, or Winforms." What they've said is, "We have a different way based on advances that have been made over the last 20 years." The fact that they will no longer enhance Winforms is their decision. That doesn't stop you from using them. You just won't gain the cool look and the better efficiency under the hood that WPF provides over Winforms.

Efficiency - specify what efficiency. I'm hearing how you need a designer to do the XAML part and a coder to do the codebehind (here come the committees). I'm hearing it needs better hardware. I've seen that it takes longer to build an interface (compating apples to apples). Prove that efficiency improves and I'll listen a lot more.

>
>>This has been my point all along. Just because MS decides the wind is blowing a new way doesn't mean fortune 500 companies are going to start retooling all their apps. VFP & VB6 are still widely in use. Are they they best tool for the job? That's not for MS to decide.