>
Johns, mistake is that he thinks that VFP has no characteristics that have an advantage over VFP.
<

You mean advantages over VS .NET?

<
He clearly underestimates the power of VFP in the data arena.
<

Clearly? I don't under-estimate the power. Rather, you over-estimate the value it has to the outside world.

<
Futher he ignores the tremendous investments in code (e.g. frameworks) people have in VFP. Well go out and throw it all away !
<

No.... This is one of the reasons why I chose to include VFP in my .NET/COM Interop article for Code Magazine..

<
Unless, maybe like john, you don't have invested much into code and frameworks.
<

You assume a fact that is not in evidence here....

>
John can yell and shout, but as long as there are no compelling, interesting products and competative (in your branche) products written with VS.NET, nothing is proven.
<

Time will tell here. One point - keep in mind that the trust of my issues are in respect to Fox and how it is perceived in the outside world. The issue is not whether VFP people should adopt .NET or Java per se - although I do have a clear preference for .NET. The issue is that VFP people need to think about the next step given where VFP sits in the hierarchy of development tools.

And for the record, I am not yelling or shouting...

<
I like to remember you of OS/2 which was technically superiour over Windows 95, well we know the story about that.
>

And this is why I keep saying that what is technically superior does not always win. Case in point...VFP in this community was considered to be technically superior to VB - yet VB was the clear winner...