>I just posted a UT news item about a report that was published on CNet this afternoon ("Developers cry foul over new Microsoft language", http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-201-4523043-0.html). What's interesting to me about this story is not that it's news to anybody in the developers community, but that it surfaced on a generic forum like CNet. There are quotes from Robert Green on one side and Karl Peterson on the other side. If you've never heard of "Visual Fred" (I hadn't), you'll find it about half way down the article.
>
>Karl's "VB.Not" site is worth a visit too (http://www.mvps.org/vb/index.html?rants/dotnot.htm). His list of incompatabilities gives a pretty good insight into what VB developers are concerned about. As I read it I asked myself, how would I feel if there were a similar list for VFP? As we debate VFP's future role vis-a-vis .Net, the CLR, and its place in Visual Studio, maybe this provides food for thought.
>
>Any comments?

I seem to recall a few years back when we went through similar growing pains...