Alejandro,

I appreciate your thoughts! You know what, we just finished a general meeting and the management decided to set aside .NET technology until it proves its worth and embraced VFP the more. The reason: the trend where a lot of WEB companies are closing down. Meaning it's not yet the perfect time to go fully in the WEB. The promises of .NET remains to be seen, and we say thanks for the VFP team making version 7 not CLR compliant yet.

>>Just as Developer 2000 tightly integrated with the Oracle Database, and you know what? No matter how ugly Developer 2000 is, it's still the viable tool used by Oracle afficionados.
>
>Jess,
>
>We know Fox is not ugly :) I hope this idea flies with MS.
>
>I've been reading up on ADO, and even though you can certainly do everything with it, my complaint is that it is not elegant, conversational, and expressive like the fox language.
>
>Some may ask, why should we want a language to be elegant, conversational and expressive? Now that speed and space are cheap the most important resource to optimize for is developer time, and clear syntaxis helps that.
>
>Using objects and methods to provide functionality is better for the language developers, since it has the advantage that you give access to users of all languages at the same time, but you give up the fluidity of the way a specialized database language like Fox does it. You might even say it's a classic tradeoff between generality and specialization. A compromise would be to give access to ADO through the established Fox syntaxis.
>
>Alex