>>>>>>>>>>So how does .NET differ from, say, VFP ?
>>>>>>>>>It's in the philosophy of application. Either local compute, storage, communication, or remote.
>>>>>>>>So how do they differ ?
>>>>>>>>The same choices are available for both platforms.
>>>>>>>Look ahead, Viv. It's in .NET's design. If you can't see it ... I can't help you.
>>>>>>Why not?
>>>>>It's one of those things you either see and understand, or not.
>>>>
>>>>And there was me thinking that the idea of UT was that people who understand things can explain them to people who do not :-{
>>>
>>>
>>>It works sometimes. Not always. "There are none so blind as those who will not see."
>>
>>Ah well. I've only been using .NET for 10 years - guess I don't know it well enough.
>>Perhaps you can give me an example of one think that .NET forces you to do that VFP does not ?
>
>I almost hate to get into the fray :) I'm not supporting his views or his agenda, however, it is well-known that MSFT's goal (not to mention google, ServiceSource, Cornerstone OnDemand, and SuccessFactors, etc - the list is huge and growing) is to move everything into the cloud one-day and eventually move away from pc's, servers, and devices that store anything locally. It's a money-making view, not political AFAIK. Get the data and the apps that businesses need or users think they need, and charge for it :) Everything MSFT (and most providers) does is geared toward that eventual outcome. MSFT is too slow and way behind the curve - not to mention killing their own money-makers in the process. There are too many others ahead of the game. I think the fear of the extremists is not MSFT so much as it is that one day, all your business will actually be hosted and controlled (or could be stolen by) by a foreign entity. Businesses don't enjoy a Niprnet and Siprnet (yet) and when they do, it may actually be controlled outside their own country. Maybe I've spent too many years working on government networks or working for companies that provide business solutions to government and financial entities... :) Having written all that, in his case, I wouldn't be surprised to see him on a future episode of "Doomsday Preppers." :) I wouldn't be surprised because I actually know a few in the financial industry and the government industry who hold the same view he does (minus the religious agenda in most cases though). My thought has always been - even if you think or fear or believe it may one day happen - do you really want to live your life in fear and preparation for the end of the world apocalypse or the second coming? :) Well, maybe if there is some monetary gain in it - then it's a business decision :)

Haven't seen you posting here for a while. Nice to see you back (and with a vengeance :-})
Snip : "Get the data and the apps that businesses need or users think they need, and charge for it"
Isn't that what we also do ? :-}

I guess there are three factors to consider when assessing the pros and cons of a cloud based approach;

(a) Cost : In a lot of scenarios there can certainly be a cost benefit for a cloud based approach.

(b) Security
(i) Will you lose your data
(ii) Will someone steal it
Again for (b)(i) it could be argued that data storage is actually safer on the cloud.
For (b)(ii) : I guess it's possible that an employee of the provider could access the data ; but any data exposed over the internet whether cloud or local server based is equally at risk to 3rd party hackers.

(c) 'Religious/Political' agenda
I'll pass on that one :-}