>How indeed, I completely agree. It is no longer safe to bring customers or potential staff here.

Is'nt that sad? Are we digging our own grave?


>JR>Customer expectation, funding or other issues may make it an excellent proposition.
>HR>Could you be more clear and specific on this statement? Pardon me for not understanding what you say.
>
>Maybe your customers say they want dotNET and will pay. Maybe MS says it will pay you to use dotNET. Maybe you are a dot com and glowing press releases about your coolness matter more than making a profit. Maybe you've furious because your local MS did not support VFP in a bid you really wanted. Maybe you can find good dotNET developers but can't find VFP developers. There are lots of reasons and no right answer that fits all.

Agreed. Makes sense.

>We went VFP/SQL. At the risk of starting another conflict, if you use VFP Views you can develop one app that works with local/sql server/oracle databases without having to write specific code. Look at fox.wikis.com and look up about accessing data.

Meaning that VFP/SQL should be the route?
>
>>>IT tends to evolve continuously and the puspose of this thread is to see how a developer should position himsefl/herself strategically too.<<
>
>VFP is probably one of the few products that has remained reasonably stable for 5 years. whether that is a benefit or a negative depends who you ask. < g >

As a stable product, then VFP should have no problems moving on further and getting better. Or am I wrong?


Thank you John.