Sergio? I like that. <s>

At this point, eTec has destroyed their commercial viability. There are steps they can take to regain it, and I hope they do that.

Whether they do or not, as you point out they have an outstanding technical achievement. I am rooting for them to pull it off, to complete the product and in doing that show what can be done. Theoretical pontificators here and in other places assured us all that VFP could never be ported to .Net. Whether I ever get to use the product commercially or not, I'll be smiling for a long time if/when they finish the product. Of course, I don't expect the theoretical pontificators to eat their words publicly, but just the thought of them having that particular meal privately will enrich my life for a long time -- probably for the length of time I knew them to be talking through their hats but didn't have a means of proving it, which goes back at least 5 years (when Frank Camp got tired of my complaining about the nay-sayers and created ASELOBJ() in .Net <s>), but probably at least a year before that.

Go, eTec, go!

Hank

>>>>>>The etecnologia site has added a March 2010 update.
>>>>>
>>>>>How did you find out? I own the product but did not receive and email as they have in the past.
>>>>
>>>>This guy couldn't run a lemonade stand. He may have some good technical ideas but he has the business sense of a gnat.
>>>
>>>Mike and Scott, it's uncalled and unfair to put the guys down.
>>
>>Why so? I think they richly deserve being put down. They created a lot of hope around here and never delivered. Losing Hank Fay's support through apparent lack of attention was all too typical. I don't bear them any personal animosity but I do think they messed up pretty badly.
>
>Hi Mike
>
>I am staggered by amount of negativity directed at these guy here. For crying out loud, they live in Guatemala, and many of them perhaps do not speak english that well to be able to communicate here. I don't know what ever happened to that Samuel David guy
>that appeared here frequently at the beginning, perhaps he is no longer in the picture and they simply did not find adequate PR replacement. They could be squised by other (billable) work, it could be personnel issues ,it could be anything.
>
>But is the communication failure (admitedly evident at this point in time) so severe problem that people here feel right to immediately throw stones at them ? C'mon! I can understand very well Hank Fay or BL for being frustrated after investing siginificant time
>into researching promoting the project, but what is everybody else's excuse ??? I am sure both Hank Fay / Boudewijn would gladly forgive them if this proves to be simple communication gap issue, and they do make real break-through at the end.
>
>They did ship another version at the end, and I would not be surprised if someone from eTech pops up here to issue some announcements related to their newest release. If they do, what state of affairs they fill find here ??
>Traditionally friendly and well-spirited Foxpro community ?? If you were in their shoes, how would you feel comming up here
>to announce new version ?
>
>Community might have some reasons to be upset with their lack of communications, (and considering high expectations) but we should also show some respect and solidarity in this case, because sucessfull outcome of their venture might indeed change certain
>realities and perceptions when it comes to FoxPro. They already raised some bars when it comes to what is possible in NET, and I am confident that given some more time, they will rise those bars even further. We have nothing to loose but only to gain.
>So what is there to be so negative about?