>It's not a done deal by any stretch of the imagination. Ok, let me back up a little bit and explain where this comes from a little bit...
SNIP

Thanks for clearing that up since I think it will help keep the discussion on a more even keel.

MORE SNIPPING

>The reality of it is, and again, this is solely my opinion, MS does not want new VFP developers. They want new .NET developers and they're not going to give the Fox team a bunch of money to help them achieve something contradictory to their long-term goals. They're also not going to spend much on marketing VFP as part of VS.NET either. They only keep VFP around to pacify us until they figure out what they have to do to migrate us into their other tools or until the community is small enough to be deemed insignificant.
SNIP-SNIP

I hope you don't get flamed because I think you are absolutely correct.

SNIP
>I do see that changing in the future and am looking very closely at C# and ASP.NET. Maybe by .NET 2.0 (or .NET 1.0 SP?) we'll do most of our work in these technologies, but for the time being, we're focusing on Fox and where it makes the most sense to integrate with the new technology in .NET. The jury is still out as to whether or not .NET will actually work and if companies will be ready to adapt it.

I see this taking a minimum of two years after the official release before we know the answer. It's not going to be an easy jump and I think there will be lots of people waiting on the sidelines until they see if it will fly. Probably more than usual.

> In the long-term, I’m betting that it does and that when it does, C# will be the language of choice.

Is this based on the flexibility of C#?