You could'nt be more right when you say that when MS wants to do something they have the power to do it

Don't you think that if it ever was in their plan it would be there as we speak?

I don't understand why VB isn't a true OOP environment yet. I am not an OOP expert (So I could be on shaky grounds here) but it seems to me that the concept of OOP in VFP is similar to what could be found in Delphi, VC++ and other development tools which is not the case with VB.

Why VB is lacking this? Maybe porting FP to oop was easier because the team was smaller so the communication was better. Last time I heard there were 250 persons developing VB. It would be quite an accomplishhment to take all of these programmers and make them modify VB and make it a real OOP language.

So again maybe the only solution is to rewrite it entirely. Ultimately this means two teams working on VB at the same time.



>>OK..I'll clarify this...it won't happen for some time.
>
>So, you think it won't happen for some time since you think it would involve a total re-write of the product. i.e., you don't think MS has the resources to do this in a timely manner....
>
>>FP kernal was not rewritten. Big difference here.
>
>
>Again, you comming up with the kernel argument. So, you are telling me that in reality, FPW 2.6 was better setup to receive OO than VB 6???? Is this the argument you are making here?
>
>VFP in reality as an xBase langauage with OO extensions....
>
>Are you telling me that VB could not be a Basic language with OO extensions????
>
>I think it is time is here to stop resorting to "anecdotal" evidence in your argument Craig. Alot of people say what you are saying. Eventually, it becomes an urban myth. MS is a big company, as we all know. If MS wants to get something done, it will do so. How quickly did MS make the turn from casting the internet aside to being the dominate player????
>
>MS reaction to this not only stopped on a dime, it gave you 9-cents change.
>
>
>So, will it take a long time. It might. But it has nothing to do with the "kernel" or anything else technolgically. You said it yourself, they did not rewrite the Fox kernel. FWIW, I don't know this to be true. I suspect it is, but have never heard anything offical. Regardless, if MS wants to do it, they will...
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>Would people abandon VB? Some would, yes. But, VB would probably gain lots of new users too.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I think very few people would abandon the product for gaining new features. In fact, few people dump a tool because of it. The failure to support some old features or some other shortcomming, sure. However folks don't dump tools for simply getting new features...
>>
>>I don't think they would abandon VB because of the new features. The few that would abandon it would do so because of perceived bugs in what I am calling a 1.0 product. There would be others that quit using it because they can't grasp inheritance.