>>A VFP .Net would simply be VB .Net.
>I Agree but why not move VFP towards being CLR compliant.

Why? It would no longer be VFP. Think about what makes VFP what it is. IMO, the language is important, but its the data capabilities that make it unique.

>
>>All data access would be through XML or ADO .Net.
>Why? Are you saying that VFP's native data engine could not be ported to code that is CLR compliant? How about the entire VFP runtime for that matter.

All .Net languages use the Common Language Runtime (CLR). All data access is via XML or ADO .Net. You can get to Fox data today through the OLEDB provider, however, it does not run as managed code.