>>>>> VFP3 brought huge improvement.
>>>>>
>>>>>You either have a very short memory, or you weren't working with the tools at the time. Reaction to VFP3 was rather negative - terrible performance and a rather unhealthy list of bugs. There was an undertone at some of the conferences back then - subtle dancing around the VFP 3 deficiencies. I know many who wished that MS would have simply taken 2.6 for Windows and natively incorporated stuff like GenScrnX and TabX, etc. Some commented that VFP3 was not totally unlike Ashton Tate's dBase IV. It took MS until August of 1996 to release a much better VFP 5.
>>>>>
>>>>>As for your other point, I read these posts from you and I really wonder about the perspective. There are MANY who relied neither on L2S nor the EF - they built their own frameworks (or bought something Mere Mortals or another .NET framework). I authored a free data access framework in 2005 as part of a series of CoDe articles, and had over 1,000 people download it. So there's a "silent majority" of folks who tackled many of these problems and moved on. I'm sorry JR, but you're trying to reframe history in a much more narrow window that what really exists.
>>>>
>>>>That is not my recollection of VFP3 at all. (I mention only in passing that I was in the Alpha). The bugs were significant but that was not known for a while, and even then among the developers using it every day, not generally known. And performance? What on earth are you talking about? It was still known as the fastest database product around. "Nothing runs like the Fox" -- ring a bell? That may not in fact have been correct but that was the image. You may also recall that FoxPro demos included a near instantaneous lookup returning a dozen rows from a 3 million row table while SQL Server was still demo-ed using Pubs. The press reception was excellent. It was in many ways a groundbreaking product. We are on the same page circa 2010 but let's not distort the past.
>>>>
>>>>Which specific conferences do you mean?
>>>
>>>
>>>I used VFP 3 for a production project for a client and I remember the heartache and general dislike by many VFP'ers. It was probably the singularly worst release VFP ever had..
>>
>>I agree. By far the worst for VFP. In the class of FPW (any version) - maybe even buggier.
>
>There was a VFP3 for Mac. Not merely buggy, pretty much unusable.

Never had the .. er.. pleasure of trying that one.

I did use FP/Mac which I mainly detested because it was on a Mac (Mac+ at the time IIRC).