>
You are a liar. Stop insulting me, you bozo.
>

You tell/encourage people to sit by and wait, that it is not worth the investment. There may be something soggy there, whether it is between your ears or somebody else, who knows.

For example, the argument you put forth about the inability to teach .NET is rediculous. First off, since when does any programming class teach a student how to use the tool in a particular circumstance. The class room must have bounds placed on it. It is all about theory, about what the tool can do, not what it can do in a particular circumstance. You lobbing ethical bombs at others is rediculous.

Unethical behavior would be akin to bilking a client out of lots of money with little or nothing in return or perhaps making the client pay $100,000 when it is in the body of common knowledge that a problem could be solved for a tenth of that amount. Drastic cases like this go more to illustrating the point. Adopting dotNET or encouraging folks to learn and invest the time does not come close. As with any training, getting familar with the tool ahead of time makes a lot of sense. Still, seeing and using the tool in an academic environment has merit. It is a completely clean slate. There are NO best practices yet.

Face it Steve, you have an agenda and a position to protect. MS's agenda is clear: to make money for the shareholders...PERIOD. This thoerhetical bend you have gone on lately has no merit whatsoever in the practical world.

>
Your claim that there is zero opportunity cost to a multi-year investment is bogus. You are the one who speaks without forethought.
>

Your multi-year hypothesis is bogus. The prudent developer is going to spend X dollars/time in learning anyway. So you see, whether the developer spends 100 hours learning about optimizing Fox techniques or learning about .NET, the out of pocket $'s are the same. As far as the future is concerned, there is a big difference.

Steve, give a developer $5,000 budget for investing in his own intellectual capital. He can invest it in VFP or dotNET. This is my hypothetical so I get to make the rules. You might counter that a blended approach would work. I would counter that a dollar spent in learning about .NET and how to use the framework, VB, C#, etc is far better spent than it's VFP dollar alternative.

Investing in VFP strategies is like putting earings on a pig or sending a whore flowers. In the end, you still have a pig, you still have a whore. It is throwing money away on a scheme with a decreasing marginal utility. You want to go down the economics road, be my guest. I will counter your economic arguments, either micro or macro in spades. And, I will leave out the ad hominum attacks. You want to have an intellctual debate, fine. Make your next move. For sure, every statement you make up here about why folks should not investigate and invest time and yes $'s in dotNET will be attacked: head on and in spades. I invite you and any of you dotNOT friends to join the fray. You better bring your best intellectual firepower and someting more substantial than calling me an idiot, liar, or bozo.

Your move.