>Vb 7 is not yet a product available to the public and the way I understood Craig?s comment was because of .NET technology a developer would have to ?rewrite applications or rearchitect many of your applications?.
>
>The structure of the sentence lead me to believe there was an expectation that .NET technology would require going back to applications already created. I see no value in that unless the client is paying for new Microsoft Technology. I have been looking for such clients but in my 18 years of software development, I must say that I have not yet found one. Clients just are not interested in updating existing applications just because Microsoft has introduced a new acronym.

Sure, they will update for a different reason, and they'll want some Web functionality, plus a couple more of the new stuff... now which tools would you use to do it? Would you have to buy both hammer and nail all over again, plus learn how to hold them and where to hit - the nail's head is somewhat different now. Or maybe you could still use your old hammer?

I think the line between the portability of our tools and the need to rewrite or rearchitect would meander in unpredictable curves... just because Microsoft has introduced a new acronym.

>Personally, if I wanted to use .NET technology I would be doing so with a new application and only then when I thought the tools and technology were stable. Using the latest greatest technology does not always mean success. Version 1.0 of any product is suspect in my book.

That is, if you had the luxury of picking your moment. Some people won't be that lucky, and in a year, we'll witness interesting tales here, like "does anyone have a converter from 3.0 to .net" :)