>
>Can we drop the XBase stuff? It is one of the things that scares people away. Take a look at the marketing info on the VFP web site. Not a word about XBase.


Whether we like it or not, a lot of people with legacy DOS and Windows systems still think of FoxPro as this dBase clone. Just in the past week, I've seen a regional record store chain that uses a FoxPro/DOS app for order entry and customer service, a hospital that uses an xBase application (couldn't tell which flavor) for their ER patient tracking system, and a national moving company that uses FoxPro for Windows for most of the rday-to-day operations. These are the people who still lookat FoxPro, ignoring the "Visual" part of it. Then they see Visual Basic (they've never heard it called anything else), decide to use an "object-oriented" development tool, and I lose work to the VB team. I forget who suggested the idea of a name change for VFP to something without the "FoxPro" in it, but they might not have a bad idea.

Sorry, didn't mean to get off-topic, but until VFP gets completely away from all resemblence to xBase (and no, it will never happen), the comparison to 15-year-old technology can't help but be made. That's why my original post reminds us that whether it's Visual or not, the battle of FoxPro vs. dBase is still being fought.