>>>Unless web coverage is actually goal of app, I cannot see how web app can be superior to desktop (native) one.
>
>Agreed. But if people start with "Everybody knows that browser apps are the future" then they can insist that NET is just as good as anything else for the backend and that the non-MS device is irrelevant, because it's just a support system for the browser.

What I find confusing is that M$ is the one that pushed web development (using NET) as their major strategy whereas
once everything runs in browser they can kiss their Windows/Office monopoly good bye. At the end it will be their discontinued
products (apps written in VB , VFP etc) as only show stoppers for companies moving to other operating systems.
If major company app is converted to web app (be that NET or more likely something else) then what is there to stop them from
moving to Linux in some future? Some will say Linux flavors do not have good support ecosystem, but that might change.
Ever since Vista blunder, my 15 years old is using Linux. For these generations Linux/Android ring much more bells then
Windows/NET/Office. They learn NET development as part of colleges curriculums but web development is far from being M$ exclusive turf ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_development ) youngsters are more likely to use NON-MS web dev tools and platforms
Consecutively, tomorrows working place might look quiet different in terms of apps/OS then it is today.

>So the MS developer still is in the hot seat, hurrah! It's ironic that some of those who scoffed at VFP as MS foxed it, now depend on extremely unlikely arguments to justify clinging to NET.