Mike,

>>Maybe some just would like to leverage what they have rather than begin a cycle of developing expertise all over again.
>
>Have you missed the VB .NET uprising?

No, I didn't miss it. I didn't miss the 'quiet revolution' when VFP3 was delivered either, when many either just left FP/VFP for good or chose to ignore VFP.

>I would guess VFP would have to change enough that you'd have to ramp up at least as much as it would take to learn C# or VB .NET (but remember that I'm the guy that thinks all languages are the same, just with different dialects).

Firstly, a VFP.NET would necessarliy be a subset of VFP proper, as I understand it. My point was that VB already has subsets. VFP could too.
Secondly, I agree that languages are basically different dialects. Good design isn't done in a computer language. But dialects take a fair bit of work in order for one to become effective at communicating in that dialect. I have had trouble with southerners, Kiwis, Scots, Cockneys and any number of other English folk. With considerable effort I might be able to get along but I can never be clear with them.

>So why not just learn one of those two languages rather than burn the VFP team's limited resources?

"Burning the VFP Team's resources" is a problem of mine???? Does that mean that those responsible for the selection of "features" to add to VFP6 are now in purgatory or elsewhere?!?! Making and maintaining a VFP.NET in addition to regular VFP might be a huge job or it might be a piece of cake. I have no idea.

>We'll never have time to add features to the report writer if we had to compile to the CLR. (Disclaimer: the previous statement was an attempt at humor. Call it sarcasm, call it facetiousness, call it what you will, but it implies no promise of any new features for the next version of VFP.)

My main point is that people who are intimate with VFP will naturally ask for a .NET version rather than simply accept that the have to LEARN another language. Is it so hard to grasp that people who worked hard 'getting' the subtleties of VFP don't want to spend an even greater amount of time learning the same for yet more languages and facilities???? Is it that hard to grasp that people do not want to be in the 'minimally capable' category for expertise in a language for years to come? Especially when we have much of the real object orientation (and its concomitant constraints) that is proving so bothersome to the VB folks.
Jim