I am not mistaken in essence - my complete sentence was: "FIC seems to me essentially a convertor which enables VFP apps to run on a server and appear to the user via their browser". Essentially this is correct: FIC converts your VFP app into HTML/JS/CSS (your words) and that runs on a server and the user's browser. But that claim means you don't compare apples with apples.

Either you want to compare VFP to other modern dev-tools, like .Net or whatever, or you want to compare HTML+JavaScript+CSS with other modern dev-tools. If you stick with VFP and develop in VFP you are limited by the VFP IDE and command/function set no matter what you subsequently convert that code base to.

Or you want to trumpet the power of HTML+JavaScript+CSS, in which case you are promoting the advantages of another development tool(s) and not VFP. Agree that HTML+JS+CSS is a powerful and modern development platform but then to take advantage of that platform one would need to learn it because if you don't then you will be restricted by the current VFP command/function set and IDE.

I see 3 possible FIC propositions:

1) If the proposition is that FIC converts your existing VFP app to another dev-tool / language and that will therefore help a developer jump start their development in that new dev-tool language while saving the work done in the VFP code base that's fine - I agree and that should be an option for anyone with a large code-base and no business case to re-write. But you are then also advocating either learning a new dev-tool / language (in your case HTML+JS+CSS) or be stuck with and limited to the VFP IDE and command / function set.

2) If the proposition is that FIC provides a means to prolong your VFP skills for new projects, which is what the original discussion in this thread was about and to which I was replying, then that I think is a mistake. For the average developer (i.e. the vast majority of us) the loss of some VFP specific knowledge will be more than offset in gained productivity by using a new IDE, new commands / functions, and new tools within, I guesstimate from some experience in learning several languages in my careeer, 6 months.

3) If the proposition is that FIC allows you to put your VFP applications on the web then that's fine but your competition is then products like 2X and TSPlus which are, in my opinion, a far better solution because they require no code change at all (don't even need to re-compile), no interface change at all, nothing new to learn, setup in minutes, available on all platforms immediately; Windows, iOS, Android, Linux - and on all devices; desktops, laptops, tablets, smartphones.




>You are quite mistaken about FoxInCloud. It does not make a VFP app "appear to the user via their browser." It adapts a VFP app and creates actual HTML/JS/CSS, just as if you had done it yourself with HTML, jQuery, etc. You then have an HTML/jQuery app which you can run as is or add anything you might normally add to an HTML/jQuery application.
>
>And the app still runs fine as a VFP app.