I'll second all of that.

Have a great New Year.

Michel.

================ Original message follows ====================

>>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).