>First off, I see very little VFP FUD. Who is using or promoting VFP to scare people? <What I meant was VFP on the *receiving* end of FUD. Why else do we have all these "Is VFP Dead?" -type threads.
>>(Tool/nail)<<...another red herring. VFP developers made their mark by providing value to their clients -- saving their client's money.<I have no argument there ... VFP is a great development tool, and inexpensive (when compared to things like SQL Server). But it can't be all-things-to-all-people, but I think there's a good niche for VFP apps. ASP.NET and ADO.NET are *vast* improvements over classic ASP and ADO. And they can be utilized from within a VFP app. Why would anyone want to design a web application with these old classic technologies anymore? I'm *not* talking about converting old apps (although that's not a bad idea in the long run). But, if you, as a developer, are designing and writing a new application, wouldn't you want to go with the best? Don't you think that a VFP desktop app, with maybe VFP middle-tier components,coupled with an ASP.NET web interface is probably better than the kludge we have to do know to web-enable a VFP app?
>Within this enormous FUD campaign, MSFT can't specifically cite how small businesses can save money going to .NET. You know why? Because they can't.<Well, I guess that all depends on exactly what you're getting at by asking "how small business can save money". We're a small business, we're writing a .NET app. We're not saving any money by writing a .NET app, so that's not why we're using it. It just seems like the right technology for the job-at-hand. We could have used VFP in there somewhere (as the desktop UI ... we aren't, but there are many reasons for that and I'm not gonna discuss them here). Plus, we don't make any money anyway until we *sell* the app. My point is that your argument maybe applies to in-house development of stuff for a company, but perhaps not to developers who develop apps for others or who sell shrink-wrapped software. Our customers don't care what language the app is written in.
>There's a lot of Dot-Coms that got seed money to buy expensive, new, proprietary development tools -- and failed.<Sorry, I don't see what this has to do with anything that's being discussed. What do expensive, new, proprietary development tools have to with .NET apps? Nothing, as far as I can see. VS.NET is not all that expensive, especially if you already have a MSDN subscription. Could you explain this statement?
~~Bonnie
