>>
>I don't doubt that there is lots of work on-going with .NET, involving lots of people who are "experts" at some other development environment.
><
>
>If a group of people know more about an environment than anybody else, they are the experts. It is a relative thing.

C'mon John. You know that isn't true.

>
>
>
>>I don't doubt, either, that they are delivering interesting applications.
>
>Thats what counts...

Does it really? Our VFP framework deliverers delivered 'interesting' frameworks using VFP's 3 version. They made MAJOR changes once they had a better understanding of VFP's OOP and how better to exploit it. In some cases maintaining upward compatibility was impossible. Now if this is the case with a OOP of less than 30 classes and only basic capabilites (OOP-wise), what does it say for a widely integrated product (.NET) that has thousands of classes and much more complex OOP capabilities and continues to change on a weekly basis???

>
>>
>In another thread where someone asked for the 'best practise' for some .NET nit you answered (correctly, in my humble opinion) that it seemed premature to you to have any "best practise" known for .NET given its breadth and newness. It is clear in my mind that one cannot have "expertise" for something where best practises remain undetermined. Wouldn't you agree?
>>
>
>Best practices are borne of practical experience, which there is little of. Still, there is a considerable amount of knowledge in the bank now that can be applied to .NET. If you adopted objects and embraced OO, in many ways, .NET is an incremental stepping stone and not this huge revolution that people have been talking about.

But it is a huge revolution. We all know that the vast majority of existing developers are VB6 or prior and thus have no practical experience in OOP. No stepping stones there.
Us VFPers have only a marginal advantage over the VB6 folk given the depth of breadth of .NET over VFP's. We have one or two stepping stones, early in the voyage, and after that we meet up with the VB.notNET folk.