Hi John,

>>What about Jave, Assembler, C, Cobol, Fortran, etc..
>
>
>What about them?

Visual Studio is still Visual Studio.

>
>>
>You could take VB out of VS and it would still have value I'd think. Or VSS or perhaps some others as well.
>>
>
>Remove VB as a product and MS is dead, period. VB is everywhere. It is the way you script the OS, it will be in SQL Server, it is in Office, etc, etc. VB is probably the most pervausive entity at MS. If there is one thing that is common across the company, it is VB, to one extent or the other.

I didn't say Microsoft, I said Visual Studio. Visual Studio is nothing more than a package of product Microsoft wishes that developers would use. The inclusion of FoxPro can be interpreted either as a way to move VFP'ers away from VFP or as a way to make sure VFP continues to be a viable product. Based on my observations of MS over the years they will just let a product die if they wish it so - but they are in the business of making money and the VFP team is the most profitable team - per capita in all of Microsoft. Based on what I've heard, which may or may be correct. Now VB brings in more dough but profitability per head is 'owned' by VFP. Again, this is from one of my sources and is not a statement of personal knowledge.

>
>Comparing VB's value to VFP's in VS? I am not sure this is an argument worth having. After all, which tool did MS decide to include in the CLRT in the next version?

*shrug*

Makes no difference either way. VFP is still a great product, still in demand and with everyone here is saying just how hard it is to find good VFP programmers I'm just tickled pink to be a VFP programmer. <g> Does that mean I won't take the time to learn VB or Delphi? No way.

>
>This is not to say that VFP does not have value, I think it does. I am an advocate for removing VFP from VS. It stands on its own right. On its own, VFP is in far better shape than being included in Visual Studio. Included in VS, VFP's marginalness becomes soldified.
>
>That is my point of view on the matter. It is neither right or wrong, just my opinion. And certainly, it is not expressed in an air of hostility...

Righto, and in my case not taken with an air of hostility whatsoever.

I am curios as to why you think VFP should be taken out of VS though. I guess I see VFP being in VS as positive for VFP, not negative.

My glass is half full on this matter whereas yours seems to be half empty.

>
>
>
>>Does that mean that the products would become valueless? No, not at all. VB is very valuable but it also does not define VS in and of itself. IOW, I'd postulate that VS is really not much more than an artificial grouping of products that have a common interface and agreement (by virtue of corporate dictate) to work with each other.
>>
>>IOW, it's just a great way to sell a series of products and to market the company in the process.
>>
>>I'd guess that VFP being included in VS was probably more driven by MSFT's desire to wean folks away from the language than to promote VFP. I'd think it has been something of a surprise that VFP has continued to be an energetic player in the marketplace of developers. You can surely bet your bottom dollar that had VFP not been a contributing member to MSFT's 'vision' that it wouldn't continue to be there.
>>
>>For me the glass is half full, not half empty and VFP's inclusion is evidence of its value.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I would suggest that "moving on" should not be an option for anyone. Knowing how to develop in VFP will always be an important skill. You never know where the opportunities lie. Learning VB and (gasp!) VC++ or (shock!) Java are things that we should all consider, not as a focus, but at least be comfortable developing simple apps in those platforms.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Your right, it is not an option, it is a foregone requirement...
>>
>>Sure, and in ten years we'll all be moaning about the demise of VB and the rising star of [???]. I'd think that in this we all agree.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>someone who can adeptly program in both VFP and VB. To me, that's the best of both worlds, he can creat killer data apps as well as killer processing apps.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yep, that is why I spent so much time learning VB.
>>
>>Right. I thinklearning VB and by association more of the lower level Windows stuff is vital as well. That, in and of itself, provides no proof of VFP's demise IMO.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>That's JMHO: Don't be afraid of the future, move agressively towards it with open eyes and an open mind.
>>>
>>>Good advice..
>>
>>Indeed..
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>DD


Best,

DD