>>>>>I don't know VB. Why do you say that VFP is more OOP than VB?
>>>>>
>>>>>Vlad
>>>>>
>>>>>>What I really mean is, why did vfp become more OOP than vb? Even if vfp isn't really going to die, it certainly seems like vb got 10 times the attention from Microsoft. Given that fact, how did vfp end up with more OOP features?
>>>>
>>>>Among other things, major difference is VFP is object "oriented" (inheritance). VB is object "based" (no inheritance).
>>>
>>>Are you sure? What version? I'm almost sure that this is not true anymore for VB5.
>>>
>>>Vlad
>>
>>You may be right about VB5. I don't use VB either. Only going by what I learned about a year ago in some VFP training.
>
>I would say that we must compare corresponding versions and not blame what we don't know. :)
>
>I just heard too many times non-FoxPro programmers blaming VFP (without knowing VFP, obviously). :) I don't want to do the same with VB! :)
>
>Vlad

Greetings colleagues,

VB 5.0 continues to be object based, I believe. Microsoft has a White paper on selecting MS development tools accessable in the VFP premium (owners) area of MS.

Related to this subject is the fact that here in Washington, DC (on of the larget VFP markets in the U.S.) I see a noticable shift to VB 5.0. I believe that this trend is driven by Microsoft's marketing, and by the fact that VFP
developers are difficult to find and cost more. Since VFP 5.0 allows apps to
talk to MS SQL Server and Oracle, etc., VB 5.0 is beginning to take business away fro VFP 5.0.

I talked to a developer who tours with Microsoft developer seminars promoting
his company's product. He mentioned to me a few months ago that Microsoft STILL
doesn't mentioned VFP 5.0 as part of it's enterprise solutions strategy.

If you check out this month's (November's) FoxPro Advisor, an ad from Micromega
for training classes mentions that they soon will have a class titled "Visual Basic for FoxPro developers (page 13).

A word to the wise...