There are lots of options out there for new development. Personally I've chosen the .NET path originally because it was the closest thing to Fox and offered both Web and Windows development at the time. Now .NET is also cross platform and has tooling for most platforms including mobile (using Xamarin). It works very well on the Web, on desktop (Windows) and has options for creating mobile apps via Xamarin.

One of the main reason I've stuck with .NET over the years is that it's the most widely used platform for Windows desktop apps today of which I still have a need for both for myself (tools mostly) and also for a number of clients. There aren't many options for desktop apps anymore as vendors seem to have lost interest in OS platforms in general (both Microsoft and Apple haven't done squat to their languishing OS offerings). One other popular option today is Electron which is basically Web based UIs that run on the desktop but that brings a whole other set of issues (like having to build out most of your desktop UI through clumsy Web interfaces).

I've seen a lot of people transition from FoxPro to .NET and work with quite a few clients that have made that switch. Some have done really well and really embraced the changes and for those people there's no going back. Others have not fared so well. How well that goes mostly is about attitude. If people move and expect .NET to behave like FoxPro things are going to be difficult. A lot also depends on how you built FoxPro applications. It has always been possible to build FoxPro applications in well organized way using Business Objects and proper separation of concerns that is much closer on what you pretty much have to do on other platforms. if that's the way you already work, transitioning to other technologies will also be much easier.

Switching to any language other than xBase will be a learning curve, but again I think the biggest hurdle to success is clinging to old ways of doing things and expecting things to work the same way. With an open mind to different approaches any new platform can be adapted successfully.

+++ Rick ---


>Hi all,
>
>I have been tasked with figuring out the future in regards to my main client's database. Even though everything is working fine for them in VFP, since I plan to retire in about 5 years, they want a roadmap now about "where are we going". Even though I have said that VFP could well run just fine for many years and that there are other developers around who could maintain it for them, they want to know what the alternatives are and what they should be planning for (timelines, budget etc). If they do decide to rewrite, they would rather not be up against a timeline of me retiring before they have fully migrated to a new system.
>
>Their main concerns for anything new would be "is it going to be around" and "how many developers" are there out there to continue to maintain it.
>
>Before getting in to all the possibilities (I have followed those discussions here for quite some time), I want to ask about .net specifically - of which I know next to nothing.
>
>I should say first that the company has no real need for a browser-based app per se - their staff all work in the same office and they do not have people on the road. They really only need a desktop app and they have liked VFP because of a) the responsiveness and b) the "richness" of the interface. Their current app automates a lot of their work and each staff person can probably put through twice the work than what they did say 10 years ago because of their on-going investment in it.
>
>I have suggested to them at one time to "let's first replace the backend" (from native VFP tables to SQL server or Postgres or something) and they might still be open to this but what they really want is a 5 year plan and so it must include both replacing the front end and the backend.
>
>So back to .Net - since it is MSFT and "popular", it seems like a contender in that it will not disappear soon.
>
>- is this basically for building web apps or does it also do desktop apps (I see from the MSFT site that is *says* it does - but does it really do a good job at that)?
>- are there many developers using it for desktop apps?
>- does it produce nice, responsive (i.e. quick, not responsive in a web page sense) apps?
>- is the language rich enough to do most if not all that VFP does?
>
>Any thoughts appreciated! Especially from those who use it or who have tried to use it.
>
>Thanks,
>Albert