Holy small font. You must have good eyes or a low resolution.

Dr. Fulton said that a long time ago. There comes a point when it doesn't apply anymore.

Anyways, if you don't need the new features, don't use the new version. We are still using VFP 3.0 for the most part. Making new features optional would be nice, but probably not practical. Where has this ever been implemented before? I think it would just be too much work for the small benefit.

If GUI stuff slows down, say from taking 1/10 second to display a screen to 1/8 or a second, who cares? Will the end-user see the difference? No. And the point is that new equipment is faster and will normally more than offset the difference (ie. the net result will be a faster program).

Also, I am not the biggest MS fan. But I will say that they are not the only software company that requires faster hardware for desirable performance. Just take a look at the recommended minimum system requirements for most software titles on the shelf today.

Take care,
Joe



>Hi Joseph:
> <>
> I respectfully disagree. Dr. Fulton used to say to his staff: "You can add anything you want to FoxPro as long it makes the product smaller and faster." At MS, the design philosophy seems to be the opposite.
> Your point is well taken: added functionality increases the size and reduces the speed of the product. As they say: "Grove giveth and Gates taketh away". For us as developers, and for our clients, the question is: do we need the new functions that cause the product to be bigger and slower? To the extent that the answer is "no", the product becomes less well-suited to our needs. It seems to me an elegant solution would be to make these new features optional, somehow, so developers who don't need them would not be burdened with the overhead. (At least that's how I'd design it if it were my product.)
> Regards, Chaim

Joseph C. Kempel
Systems Analyst/Programmer
JNC