>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I haven't noticed any slowness yet myself but I only started looking at it. I did immediately notice that it is entirely WPF in design and opening VS2008 rdlc files requires a conversion to take place. Haven't tested bringing in an entire project or solution yet though and may not have time for that for awhile. The look and feel is really really nice though---like the x on the tabs for closing (like IE tabs) instead of all of them on the one x in the top right corner of that window.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thank you for your input. Since I don't have VS2008 and don't even know what "rdlc" is, I won't be needing conversion. I will be starting my learning of WPF; that's all. It would be nice if for WinForms application they (MS) would improve the IDE to allow for visual design (similar to what VFP does) but I am not holding my breath.
>>>>>
>>>>>What do you mean? There are plenty of visual design tools in WinForms. Now in VS 2010 they exist for WPF as well.
>>>>
>>>>Compared to VFP the VS (at least the 2005) with WinForms projects is very inferior. It is like working with .PRG only and no visual classes. Not fun at all.
>>>
>>>Have to agree with Mike on this one. The VS IDE is pretty much superior to VFP in every respect. The toolbox particularly, the document outliner, tokens, bookmarks, the search capabilities. As to visual design, at VERY least everything VFP does.
>>>
>>>The one place it falls show is in the ability to see non-default props only in the properties sheet or to easily pick "favorite" properties as in some enhancements to VFP by the VFox folks.
>>
>>You said, "at VERY least" everything VFP does.
>>
>>1. Can you add properties to a form visually? No.
>>2. Can you add methods to a form visually? No.
>>3. Can you drop a BIZ object on a form and set values to properties visually? No.
>>4. Can you create a library of your classes visually? No.
>>5. When you look at a property of a control in IDE can you tell what is the parent class of this control?
>>6. If you have a project of base classes and you make a change there, you have to Rebuilt every project that derives their classes (during the design).
>>I can go on an on.
>>
>>I think we see IDE differently. I love C# compiler; no question this is a great language. But not the IDE.
>
>I think the problem is that you think anything that doesn't work the way it does in Foxpro doesn't work.
>
>1. You can certainly add properties to a form just as quickly - and have a rich event handler paradigm available not even dreamed of in VFP (try typing property and hitting TAB)
>
>2. I think double clicking on a button and finding yourself in a pre-created button-click handle pretty much qualifies as convenient. and don't forget the two dropdowns at the top of the code page and what you can do with them.
>
>3. That's certainly what we do in Strataframe. And if you create your bizobj properly you can do the same thing. It will be in the toolbox, ready to drop on and set properties on the property sheet.
>
>4. I'm not sure creating a class library visually brings much to the table, but you can change inheritance in a way that is awkward at best in the class browser. If I create 50 business object that inherit from my framework BO and then decide I want another layer in between that's one line of code in each BO and it will take about 1 minute for all 50 in .NET.
>
>5. Sure - look at the drop down at the top of the property sheet. The designer page of the form has the information as well - and unlike foxpro, you can change the parent class there. So, you 100 text boxes on a form, you decide now you wish you had subclassed them from a new text box you created with some special goodies, or a 3rd party DevExpress textbox etc. That's a one minute job in .NET How about VFP?
>
>6 I'm not sure what the arguement is here. It is a compiled language. But I have a project of ui controls that is a work in progress that I put in at design time as part of whatever solution I'm working on. When I change one of my custom ui controls I rebuild. Now I have the new behavior everywhere in my project. Doesn't really take an longer than it did in VFP.
>
>And by all means use the cool stuff like the snippets, the tokens, the document outline, the excellent debuugging tools, enums, the wealth of third party controls that really work out of the box, unlike the wretch activex experiences we had in VFP
>
>Believe me I get your frustration, and yes, things are different, and there are even a couple of things I miss a lot, but why not just pick out specific things you find awkward and see if any of us might be able to suggest a .NET way of thinking that you might come to like just as well.
>
>You really sound like me about a year and a half ago. I *loved* the way I did things in VFP and *hated* what .NET was making me do. Fortunately I have a mentor who'd never heard of VFP and just showed me how to think .NET.

I got some fabulous news at work today. As you know, I have been trying for some time to make the switch to .NET (or at least add it to the employable skill set). As you also know, I am on a 6 month VFP / SQL Server contract, with some VB 6 and Access apps added to the mix since I started. Today my boss, who had already told me they would like to hire me, with the caveat that there are budget issues, took me aside. He said one of the .NET developers gave her two week notice yesterday and they are very interested in hiring me to take her place, possibly still giving some of my time to the VFP app. Probably a lot more .NET than VFP. The justification for my 6 month contract was a large backlog of bugs and enhancements, which is already most of the way completed. The other two developers I work with are hard core VFP and SQL Server guys with no apparent inclination to change. Nothing is official yet, and in fact there has been no formal job offer or salary discussion. It sure looks promising, though. Wish me luck!