>>But the end of the article doesn't recap the body of the article. Instead, the FoxPro Advisor reader is scolded.
>I know Daryl personally and I don't think he wrote that last section, IMO.<

Geez, Bill ... lighten up why don't ya. All your .NET trashing is just a little too antagonistic. And now you attack Daryl, a so-called friend. You won't have many left if you keep that up.


~~Bonnie


>Software Development Times (SDTimes) has published another .NET article in their latest edition (August 15, 2002). It's written by Alan Zeichick and can be found at http://www.sdtimes.com/cols/alanwatch_060.htm. Highlights include:
>
>"Although there were many hours of presentations in this (July 24) briefing...my summary of Microsoft's vision would be "Phase One: We provided powerful technologies for building applications with XML based Web services. Phase Two: Customers should build things with them.""
>
>"While some of those demos (at the July 24 briefing) were eye catching, nothing heard during the full-day session presented any innovation building atop the Microsoft .NET products and technologies..."
>
>"During the frequent breaks, I kept hearing the same refrain from other attendees, who included journalists, technology analysts and Wall Street financial types: “I wish Microsoft would tell us something new.”"
>
>"For whatever reason, compared with the world-changing views and huge vision espoused by Bill Gates two years ago, Phase Two simply seems underwhelming."
>
>---
>
>There's an embarassing wrap-up to an article in the latest FoxPro Advisor (September 2002). Written by Daryl Moore, it's titled "Security Fundamentals for VFP Developers". The article itself is perfectly fine and informative, discussing issues as cryptography, general tips for secure development, COM+ and other technical issues.
>
>But the end of the article doesn't recap the body of the article. Instead, the FoxPro Advisor reader is scolded.
>
>"...it's important for FoxPro developers to expand your horizons...and start taking on additional roles. Specifically, learn some .NET technologies (emphasis mine)...so when asked you can seamlessly integrate your new applications with existing or new .NET applications -- and perhaps get some additional work..."
>
>Analysis: Geez, where to begin.
>
>Scolding developers on their choice of tools within a Windows Security article is so out of place as to be embarrassing. This is the Microsoft Bigger Hammer School of Dentistry Marketing Technique. No mention of non-Microsoft technologies or development environments. No mention of why a developer should learn .NET at the exclusion of other development languages. How about Delphi? How about Kylix? How about PowerBuilder? What about Oracle? Hell, what about Visual FoxPro?????
>
>I know Daryl personally and I don't think he wrote that last section, IMO.
>
>Note: The most hysterical, ridiculous .NET marketing hype was around February - April of this year -- probably around the time this article was submitted.