Hi John,

>I get the idea that we all should learn something else because there is no future in VFP ? I find that hard to believe.

>What tangible things - in the world at large - can you point to that supports your premise? Things may be fine - right now - in your corner of the world. But, in the vast majority of the other areas, a downward trend exists.

Look at all the CLIPPER, DBASE, FOX2.X applications in use and still developed today ? If I go to the cart-centre, the hardresser, lots diverse government applications, they all still have DOS programs. Try to solve the riddle why...

I don't see why all full event driven Windows applications, become outdated any time soon. Because there are new technologies like .NET. What does it have to offer towards the users who should work with them ?

>So, apart from the way you *feel* - what tangible things can you point to?

Let's turn arround the question. Can you tell me why an average client cares about .NET ? They generally don't care. All they want is an application that does the job for them. From the corner I'm sitting in, I don't see the Web play an foremost important role in it. Simple web things I can do from VFP also.

I get the impression you talk about enterprise solutions. I'm talking about more standard software soultions that can be selled more than once. Take accounting software. What does .NET have to offer besides a terrible performance.

>VFP 8 isn't out yet and because of its fast dataengine it is the most logical choice for data intensive and highly data driven applications. I don't see .NET change that.

>There is another fast local data-engine...it is called MSDE and it ships with VFP... Seriously, from YOUR perspective - VFP may be the logical choice. The other 99.999999999% of the world would disagree with you.

Could you base your opinion on facts ? No more than I can, I suppose. IOW this statement has little value in this discussion.

MSDE is incompetent for a wide category of data handling issues. The cause is its set oriented nature; the inability to directly use the internal schema (like indexes) efficiently. There are a lot of identified cases where SEEK, SET ORDER TO, SET RELATION, KEYMATCH, SET NEAR functions beat the hell out of any equivalent in MSDE. I've got an accounting package (DAVILEX BUSINESS) running on MSDE which is slow as hell. You can forget very complex database calculations with MSDE at reasonable performance.

The xBase approach allows me to handle data, which SQL only dreams about. I've got a leave calculation module handling over 20 tables with complex relations, outputting an array containing the leave hours (of 12 leavesorts) for a whole year for one person in just 5 thousands of a second on my ADM 750. No SQL construction has the possibility to do this under one or two seconds.

My friend, you dearly underestimate the power of the record oriented mechanisms in xBase languages. And yes, I am aware of optimizing SQL statements in a variaty set of DBMSs.

>The mistake you make, like many in the vocal minority is that you super-impose your feelings for how the rest of the world *should* feel and make decisions from that. And, you subordinate the business practicalities to the supposed technical superior features of the product.

No, Unlike you, I take some facts known about performance and recognize the unique qualities of VFP. I can't help to get the feeling you're the one that super imposes your feelings for how the rest of the world *should* feel etc..

>I see however, the ever ongoing integration of other components. Large parts of .NET can be used from within VFP.

>There is COM Interop and I wrote an article on this very topic for CODE. But, if VFP is the tool you claim it to be, there will be no need to bail out to augment it with .NET - right???

I never said this. VFP is good at data. IMO, nothing runs like a fox. Other languages have their strengths too. .NET will be a great platform for solving WEB related issues. But the question is: "How many of us do need this". Not too long ago there was a survey about what kind of applications one mainly produces. The outcome was that about 80% still was developing monolithic applications while about 80% of the fuss up here is about C/S n-tier solutions. IOW 80% about the talk is about 20% of the business.

>Crystal Reports can be called from VFP, SQL-server can be used very easy from within VFP.

>True - but how in a material sense does this or will this make a difference?

This does make a difference to the client. They'll recognize the benefit of using CR inmediately. How does the client mesure the benefit of migration toward .NET ? This is a lot more difficult. for different clients different motivations. Not all will justify migration towards .NET.

>Personally I don't see any reason to jump the VB.NET plane, If i'm going to need .NET features (I doubt I will in the near future), I might look at C# first.

>This statement may illustrate how much understanding about .NET you may not have. The key focus is the framework - not the language. Whether you use VB or C# - your applications will be - at least right now - 80-90% the same since you primarily deal with the framework.

I was reacting on your posts earlier, heavely mentioning VB.NET. I'm perfectly aware that .NET is a framework.

>I think VB .NET will be the initial primary benefactor of this - especially since YAG is the new language evangalist..

In what way does he have any influence on the technology ?

>>More important I don't see the need to invest time in something that might be the future of developping applications. .NET might be fantastic for web services, I personally don't see a high demand for this kind of applications yet, ... and I doubt if there ever will.

>I agree and disagree here. On one hand, I don't see Web Services being the big thing that everybody will go to. I do see Web Services as an important way to augment applications.

I certainly agree, But I doubt if this decreases the importance of other types of applications.

>Like many people, I can't invest time in learning things that I might need in the future. I only can invest time in things I need right now (Like CR 8.5, SQL-server 2000, WINAPI, COM/DCOM/COM++, etc). To me, these things are more important than learning the .NET framework right now because these technologies have proven themselves and do not go anywhere anytime soon.

>You could, you simply choose not to.....Milking your cash cows without an eye to the future is bad planning....

Learning and keeping an eye to the future are two totally different things. I'll not ignore the existance of .NET, I'll know my things about .NET. However I'll not invest lots of time to learn the framework and language. That is a total waste of time. Cross the bridge if you come to it, You'll only have to know to what bridge you've got to cross. My skills, like yours are cross platform. In one or two months I could easely switch platforms, or programming language. Programming is about solving problems. Frameworks, programming languages do not change anything about this.

Not too long ago, you're preaching people to learn VB 6, because it was important to have skills in VB 6 when VFP died. Well where do we stand now ? That would have a total waste of time, because lots of people now might choose to learn Java, C# or something else.

>If one time VFP might not be suitable anymore, I'll then decide what to do. Maybe at that stage there is a new technology replacing all the .NET hype: "Well did I save me some time by ignoring that hype !"

>You are a wait and see person.. If that is good for you - great. For the most part, it is not a good strategy to employ...

This is totally your opinion, and any well thinking person would think twice to agree with you. If you look at the world arround as, how many people are experts in using two different languages ? How many people ride the hypes ? How many people just sit and wait or choose a more steady path ? Please come with facts in stead of super imposing your (or Microsofts) opinions.

>The future will tell: There are still programmers programming in COBOL and making lots of money. We'll cross the bridge if we come to it. It does not make sense to invest time in things you do not want to use anytime soon.

>The future will always tell... Watch what happens after the 2nd week of February..< bg >...

Yeah, the start of a big marketing plan, hype, and after that the annoucement that something better than .NET is being developped by another company. .NET has to prove itself before the mass of 'quality' developers will make the move.

>One last point... I respect your right to have the feelings you have and to make the decisions you feel are best for YOUR career. For the most part, I think most people would disagree with your reasoning - which is based more on your world view as opposed to an objective analysis of what is going on in the world.

That is, like you're stating yourself, YOUR opinion. People might or might not agree with what you're saying. However, until I don't see any hard facts of figures, this means nothing to me. Lets turn arround the question: How can YOU judge, what is best for someone else carreer ? Nobody can, you'll have to judge yourself. Don't forget that monkeys throwing darts at a newpaper get equal results as the average investor at wallstreet.

>I see your position as the extreme part of the vocal minority.

How about the silent majority ? What percentage of the 4GL developers are vocal? Are they vocal because they want to preach something new, because they are up to something new or screwed up in the existing technology ?

Like has been proven in several surveys, 80% of the talking is about 20% of the works. No wonder we all feel we should inmediately jump the n-tier, .NET plane (and crash inmediately after). This way we forget that an awfull lot of the works is done by all too proven technologies.

Your turn.

Walter,