Hi Jess,

IMOH, if change is not welcomed then we are doomed to be left behind all other development tools. Even Cobol is going to be on CLR and why not VFP. If we are so scared of change then we should not have taken up the IT field. IT is all about change, for better or worse.

The argument that if .NET is going to be a flop then VFP can be saved does not hold water. If .Net is to go down then MS is a goner, so what is the difference?.

It vote for VFP to support CLR technology. I have been involved in a lot of migration work and to have seamless(problem free) migration from one version of a software to another is still a dream. It like saying that you can build a piece of software that is bug free. When you move from one version to another you are bound to get new features and lose some old features. Change is the way to go and there are no two ways about it.

My two cents worth. Thanks.

Regards,
Kueh.

>Correct me on this if I was wrong, but based on Fox Wiki docs. courtesy of VFUG newsletter, several attendees of the recently concluded VFP devcon in Miami Florida were upset because the conference became a .NET centric rather than VFP centric. This goes to show that vast number of VFPers are not welcoming or not ready to play with the .NET/CLR technology yet. If .NET flops, it is to the advantage of VFPers, but if it's a smash hit, well, VFPers will fill that VFP is just a shadow in the VS box again. Well, I was not able to attend the DEVCON (as much as I want but distance and resources does not permit me though), but to me, discussing .NET technology is timely because it will give us clearer picture of what it is really. It gives us enough knowledge on how VFP will fit to our needs without being left behind by the technology again. What do you think folks?