Jim, focus, okay?

>> Although VS.NET is a version 1.0 release, how many people played/tested it through its beta stages? You could almost see the current release product as a 1.1, 1.2, or even 1.5 release.

What?? That's simply an unbelievable fabrication. Do you recall the approximate ratio of message traffic about VFP to all of .NET, combined?

>> Did ALL the applications you built with VFP 3 suck?

All mine sucked.

As I recall, the very best people in our community built Tasmanian Traders and the Samples application, over a period of several months, on two coasts. That was a single tier, unpretentious project. They had docs. Thay also had all of FoxBase, and all of FoxPro up to version 2.6 to practice with the core language.

People tend to forget how unbelievably expensive and risky developing software can be when you don't even know the blatant rookie mistakes.

Everyone except Microsoft is better served by advance reconnaisance parties going forward, and reporting back, rather than urging every Joe who's online to join the massive waste of time that is research-oriented development.

All the time I invested in Access was wasted. All the time I invested in Delphi was wasted. All the time I invested in VB was wasted. All the time I invested in Java looks to be wasted. All these were the Next Big Thing, essentially .NET without the billion dollar promotion which will, I suspect, mostly be wasted.

I mean, at minimum, can all you prophets of the future refrain from steering people until the docs are properly done?

**--** Steve





>>Sorry, Jim.
>
>Apologee accepted. < g >
>
>>How can anyone who hasn't built, deployed, and versioned a serious .NET application be offering training classes?
>
>Ok, I'll play devils advocate here... how do you know we haven't? < s > Besides, I said we haven't announced the VB.NET for VFP Developers yet.
>
>>This is just a question. Nothing personal, okay?
>
>Who said anything about taking it personal you no good, lousy, NHL-hockey-dominating, $2-coin-spending Canadian!!! < gd&rvvvvf >
>
>>Why does this simple straightforward and hopefully impersonal question strike a chord?
>
>I didn't say it did... did I?
>
>>How can a billionaire with too much money and time on his hands, someone who never had any insight into applications, or his company, which has the same attributes, suddenly develop this prescient insight into applications? Starting with zero successful frameworks developed, suddenly we are graced with the Ultimate Framework, available to all on MSDN, don't delay learning it.
>
>Exactly! And the problem is?? < s >
>
>>The level of uncritical linear thinking is just amazing to me. Everyone seems to be in collegial self-agreement that this is the way everyone will want to be developing systems going forward. Even though nobody's actually developed anything with this yet.
>
>Well I don't know if you can say no one is actually developing anything with it yet. Off the top of my head I know of three projects being built with .NET. One is very WebForms/VB.NET centric, the other two are ASP.NET centric.
>
>>In the old days, development environments went through a development, maturation, and adoption process. Evolutionary and incremental improvement is the way all worthwhile things have grown. Now suddenly we have development environments that debut at the pinnacle of desireability in version 1 form. It's amazing what money invested in development but mostly promotion can make normally smart people just gush all over themselves.
>
>Although VS.NET is a version 1.0 release, how many people played/tested it through its beta stages? You could almost see the current release product as a 1.1, 1.2, or even 1.5 release.
>
>>If you still don't get it, come over to my office and I'll pull out all my MSDN newsletters since 1993 and we can look at all those colorful middle-page-spreads, object models since renamed, then abandoned, similarly gushed-over by apparently smart people who hadn't yet actually built anything with them either.
>
>You keep them that long???? Although I do have over 100 Spider Man comic books from the late 60's and early 70's!!!
>
>>We've seen this movie before. It sucks. VFP 3 sucked. Customers I built applications for in VFP 3 are long gone, never too impressed with my abilities.
>
>You sure that was VFP 3's fau.... never mind.... relax! I'm just kidding!!! I agree, VFP 3 blew!
>
>>That's anectdotal, but VFP 3 was immature, and I should have left it mostly in the box. Applications were built with it that never should have been built.
>
>Did ALL the applications you built with VFP 3 suck? Was there a decent one in the bunch? One, two, or even three that made the clients happy they had it built?
>
>Should I be looking for your smiling face in September down in Lauderdale or are you going to take advantage of the end of the Canadian summer??