>>>Certainly, FoxPro 2 had SQL and Rushmore and that was big. But FoxPro 1.0 (and the events right after that) wound up crushing the competition.
>>
>>I was un-impressed by it solely because it was too slow on my slow machine. In fact, it was relatively awful.
>>
>>Back then, I didn't have the vision or understanding to realize that CPU speed would increase and what was slow this year in a couple years would be slow no longer. I began to realize that around FoxPro 2.x days, but I remember the first time we got FoxPro 1.x and tried it and I sat there thinking, "Seriously?" because it was just so slow. The popup windows were what made it slow. It had to render content behind other text windows, and scroll them using the CPU rather than the graphics card, or at least issue multiple scroll commands to work around the overlaid windows.
>
>I'm pretty sure Fox was always faster than dBase. :)

I only used dBASE III+ a few times. It was interesting. I could never get used to a moving dot.