>>
>>Is this part of the "best is yet to come" message for VFP? The fact that we could potentially convert thousands of VB6 developers to VFP. Now that sounds like a campaign that could really improve VFP visibility while providing a solid upgrade path to the masses. After all, there are 225 functions in VFP that are not in .NET (and not in VB6?), VB6 developers could begin using inheritance but not have to spend nearly as much time and money to move to .NET. Another plus is that VFP is backward compatabile all the way back to its roots as FoxBASE+. Can't say that about VB.
>
>Don't want to rain on your parade, but what would make a VB 6 developer really gain by switching to VFP??? If they are acomfortable in VB6 and don't want to go to 7 they're sure as hell not going to want to switch to a completely different language/environment and learn that. If anything they'll stick with VB6 until it won't run any longer...
>
>Of course VFP has many advantages over VB6, but if they didn't switch before why should they now?

All of what I said was tongue and check. However, I do think a lot of developers will give up on .NET because of the learning curve.

A campaign to move VB6 developers to VFP 7/8 might keep them in the M$ product line instead of say moving to Delphi. If there is a recommendation to move developers from VFP to .NET why not another path from VB6 to VFP?

I suppose the argument would be .NET is a more sophisticated and robust environment. Then again, you could say that SQL Server is a more robust data engine than VFP - and it is. But if that is true then isn't Oracle more powerful than SQL Server? A friend of mine deals with terrabytes of data and told me that while Oracle is up to that task, SQL Server is not.

Isn't UNIX more powerful and reliable than Windows? That being the case now you know why so many large Fortune 1000 (including M$) use UNIX servers (e.g. Hotmail), Oracle databases and the Java language as their preferred/recommended tools.