>>I seem to recall a few years back when we went through similar growing pains...
>
>Sure we did, and there are certainly some parallels here. But what I thought was interesting is the timing of this news article, the inclusion of comments from Robert Green, and the venue in which it was published, since CNet has a much wider and more general audience than do developer forums like UT, DevX, etc.

Think about how many VB programmers there are compared to VFP... and how well marketed VB is. VFP never got the press because it has always been the 'red-headed stepchild' of Microsoft.

What we are seeing is exactly what happened with VFP - only there are more people screaming, and news organizations are taking note.

I personally 'feel their pain'. I remember when all the FP2x systems would not (simply) convert to VFP. I was there, and it sucked. But looking back - I'm glad we now have a viable programming language with all the features and benefits.

VB.NET = VFP94