>VBers aren't screaming as loudly now as they were at first because MS has backed off some of the "enhancements" that had been planned for the product.

But momentum has been lost. And VB.NET and C# are a disappointment as far as I'm concerned in terms of what might have been; ie. I think VFP is more elegant.

I've worked in Visual Interdev, VB and VC++ and found it pleasant ... I think .NET is ponderous and ugly. I was so relieved that VFP7 still had the VFP6 sparkle.

>Java isn't all it's craked up to be. Periodically I read that Sun has changed something in Java that breaks the "write once, debug everywhere" mantra.

Of course, and VB isn't as good as Delphi, but VB's timing was better.

Not so with Java; it's been out of the gate for some time now and it's accumulating a significant code base. People will not start "rewriting" existing Java apps because of ".NET". And they aren't going to wait the 12-18 months it will take someone to "ramp up" once .NET is released.

Java programmers will be a dime a dozen; a good .NET developer will command a pretty good rate ... if there is any demand. Companies will go with the cheapest solution.

>>This is one MS is not going to overtake (ie. Web development).
>
>I disagree here. .Net will be successful, but it will take some time. Remember, this *is* Microsoft. Of all the things MS does, it does marketing best.

I also remember IBM ...

There is also a new generation that doesn't have the same facination with MS that "we" might have.

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who is not as familiar with MS or .NET as we are, and imagine the signals they get when they start looked at WWW, HTML, dynamic web pages, etc .... It's not .NET.

I suspect most people think of MS and Windows; when they think of the Web, they think HTML and Java. And when you search the Web for Java, you find Sun; and so it goes.

(Even my brother, who is a Fireman, does HTML and Java in his spare time ... as do his kids).

If .NET. is to make any significant impression, MS may have to give it away ... and I think we know how the courts will react to that.

>>Word had it that MS had the best Java native compiler; they should have exploited that instead of trying to change the game.
>
>MS didn't have a choice. The courts forced them out. What made their java compiler good were the Windows extensions.

Actually, I was thinking performance-wise; not function.

They weren't forced out; they decided they didn't like the rules they orignally agreed to so decided to start their own game.