>.NET is not just a buzzword or a "marketecture." There is an actual specification and rules which must be followed. If you read up a bit on the Common Language Specification (for instance, at the site of the ECMA standards body or on MSDN) you will quickly see that VFP is not .NET compliant. For starters it cannot generate CLS code. Therefore renaming VFP to indicate that it is a .NET tool would be misleading, to put it charitably.
>
>Mike

Mike;

I like your use of the word "charitably". That is indeed a fine word to use to describe what you mean. You are indeed kind. I would choose a different word or perhaps several to describe how I feel towards such a concept.

This entire thing about placing .NET on VFP makes me ill. It reminds me of a salesman – any salesman in my book. A good salesman will sell his mothers soul numerous times, to “book the sale”! Can you tell I despise salespersons? Also I despise subterfuge and lies. Honesty is the only policy in my book. Trying to “get in on the action” of what .NET marketing has to offer is absurd!

We have to be honest with our development community and ourselves. Do your best with what you have and do not worry about what .NET has to offer. Rather, you should join the .NET development strategy if it interests you and continue using VFP or whatever development tools you prefer.

Next someone will suggest we should put IBM on the VFP package to get Big Blue behind our efforts. SAP would look good too!

Tom