Borland's ObjectPAL Paradox for Windows) was also total incompatible with PAL (Paradox for DOS). I this case it was worse, there was'nt even DOS empulation.

>>And if what they did to Clipper wasn't bad enough, did anybody ever try to use their Visual Objects? Somehow they managed to detach the DBF from the form - thus destroying one of the most important attributes of xBase programming which had been available since dBaseII.
>>
>Hi Barbara,
>
>I'm not sure that was all CA. Nantucket was pretty well into VO development when CA bought it out -- at least they said they were in their announcements.
>
>IMHO someone made a very early decision not to try to preserve _any_ procedural code in VO. Consequently while Clipper syntax survived in VO it was virtually a separate app dev environment for DOS emulation within VO. A very crazy arrangement. VFP did it much better...
>
>My big gripe with VO, however, was that I could never keep the d__n registry up long enough to get anything done. Working with VO's registry has got to be like poking around a bomb to see if it will blow up. The compile and pray approach to OOPs. And over $1,000 for this turkey!
>
>Well, they paid the price. No one I know still works in Clipper or VO except to maintain older apps -- then its usually one of the Nantucket versions.
>
>Wave goodbye, Charlie Wang!
>
>regards,