>Maybe my choice of words was not correct. Yes, web development
>can be done in VFP, but it is a Microsoft solution. It takes
>third party tools to make it work as easily as ASP. Try to find
>a developer that has created VFP web solutions versus ASP (or Java).
>They are few and far between. Yes there are top notch VFP web
>developers that can do anything that ASP\Java\etc can do. I've read
>there are still people running BBS's with Commadore 64's also. No
>I'm not putting down VFP as old technology by comparing it to an
>old computer, I'm just saying there are easier solutions that
>have a following of hundreds of thousands of developers. Why
>use obscure products that have few followers when there is a
>perfectly good Microsoft solution? Why complicate the issue?
>Most important to me (and to many developers) is what about
>technical support? Tech support!!! Tech support!!!


Just because it's free doesn't mean it's the only, much less
the best choice. ASP is a good solution. But to say it's easy
is a joke unless you build nothing more than simple apps. You
probably haven't built anything to know why (no offense intended,
but when looking at ASP it's important to look further down the
line than Hello World)...


#1 ASP is easy to do easy stuff... Try to do anything complex
and it no longer is an easy tool, and you have to start dealing
with COM. Many people make the mistake of looking as ASP as
the tool to do it all - it's not and Microsoft didn't intend
it that way (at least according to several recent interviews).
It's clear if you've seen some of the spaghetti code that's
being generated by ASP coders. The way to get away from that
is to use COM, which gives you the discipline and possibly
the scalability that ASP will not give you. Walk in that door
and 'easy' is no longer a word you'll use. It takes understanding
of the architecture for building anything but trivial sites.

COM is not ASP and you can use VFP for COM just fine. You don't
even need any third party tools for that - you can call COM rihgt
of an ASP page. So, yes, you can do Web with VFP without third
party tools.


#2 When's the last time you called MS for tech support for a
very technical issue? MS doesn't provide anything but paid support
and for advanced topics support is hard to come by. This may just
be me, but I tend to think tech support for products I produce
rates a bit above that...

MS support is good on many things, but for advanced developer topics -
not so. And lack of public support that's open to discussion is a
real problem. Microsoft doesn't give a rat's ass for support and
considers it a burden (jusdging from the way it's handled)...

#3 do you really know what you're talking about? I have seen
Java solutions - it's a joke what it took to build these things
*if* they ever made it to the light of day in the first place.
Yes Java does a few things very well, but development tools suck,
it's slow and there aren't nearly the support and third party
support tools available.
I can't tell you how many times I've come in on projects that
were started with Java distributed apps that simply were aborted
because the technology couldn't get it done. The same jobs ended
up being done in VFP in a matter of a couple of weeks (and not
by me either - by motivated staff programmers).


Now I won't argue with you that it may be harder to find people
to do VFP work. Unfortunately, that's true. But for a company that
knows how to work with VFP and do it right you'll need a fraction
of the body resources you need with other tools at least for coding.

The key is the right people. Doesn't matter what tool you use if
you have people who don't know what they're doing the application
is unlikely to work well, not perform and almost certainly not
scale. VFP, VB, SQL, C++ it doesn't matter - people are the most
important thing. Sure your high school kid can create ASP pages
with a little coaching, but do you really want him to???


Use what works for you and what is the best choice for the job.
Discounting VFP outright just because of lack of 'bodies' is a
sad excuse IMHO...

+++ Rick ---












>
>A special note: I am only pursuing this discussion, even taking
>an adversarial position, to understand why VFP and third party
>products need to be used. I've used xbase since dBase II but
>don't understand the benefits as a web development platform.
>I just left a web project where I had the choice of developing
>in anything I wanted (usually I'm told what language to use).
>I've just got the go ahead on another client (after developing
>a small prototype in ASP) and can use any platform on this
>project but I don't want to say:
>
>USE bastard_system_to_develop_website ALIAS job_security
>
>
>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>And unfortunately, VFP is not suited for this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>>Just two questions,
>>
>>Isn't Universal Thread written in Visual FoxPro ?
>>
>>Isn't Visual FoxPro + Internet integration what West Wind Technologies
>>specialize in ?
>>
>>Michel.
>>
>>================== Original message follows =======================
>>
>>>>It's only a matter of time (in my opinion) until Internet/intranet >applications start supplanting the traditional LAN application that
>>>>VFP has been so well suited to.
>>>
>>>I'm actually surprised to see how many companies are
>>>starting to ask to put the application on the web instead
>>>of in the traditional exe. The added cost (twice in many
>>>cases) is less an issue then having applications that can
>>>be coninuously updated and users that can access\update the
>>>info from anywhere.
>>>
>>>And unfortunately, VFP is not suited for this. Microsoft's
>>>solution is ASP\VB Script and MTS using VB (not VFP).