>As your career progresses, you will find the answer and conclusion is not nearly as important as the rationale and means you use to arrive at that conclusion.

I've heard that over and over. To me, its always sounded like what someone without answers would say. In school, that typically means you get partial credit even though your answer was totally wrong. Yeah, thats my kindof learning *groan*

>Based on this passage, the critical element of a "new generation" of frameworks is code generation capabilities.

VB.NET and C# are simply code generators too for MSIL code. Wether its code to code or pictures to code, whats teh difference, besides the learning curve?

>It has been pretty well demonstrated that "code generators" don't work that well.

Isn't that what Access does? And even if they hadn't worked in the past, are you telling me that they never will so its not worth pursuing?

>I could go after this on technical grounds.

That would be a lot more fun.

>If a non-programmer wanted to develop applications, they would be programmers. < BG >..

I guess I just think differently cause I totally disagree.

>The question is whether frameworks exist to make it easier and more efficient to build these type of systems.

Funny, thats what I thought I was describing.

>Your 50 year context was in the province of programmers. Here, you have extended the premise a bit.

I still meant programmers. Its interesting how much you're into this subthread. All I meant by the comment was, yes, I realize that what I'm descibing is not new and has been pursued by many for a long time, but thats not discouraging me in making a prediction.