>If you'll excuse the sexist remarks, you've gotta be able to look yourself in the mirror when you shave in the morning.

Like we both do... shave, I mean :)

>As a professional, I'd hope that such misrepresentations of the product would be seen as unethical at best. Our job is to educate the client as to what aspects of technology are and are not important to them; much of the reason that my clients deal with me is that I'm an open book to them - I put my cards on the table and make certain that they understand that there is no hidden agenda. I'm encouraged when a client < intelligently > inquires why I suggest a non dotNet solution to them; it indicates that even though there's massive marketing of the sales concept out there, they trust me to explain what it really means and why it is or is not going to be important to them. I don't represent myself as infallible (I am not the Pope) but in the main, my clients trust me in the same way that they'd trust an attorney or an accounting auditor from Arthur Anderson... < g >

The whole truth of this story is that if MS says the milk is green, it will only mean that the meaning of word "green" has broadened, under the influence of new technology etc etc.

We're already having VFP geared towards more and more levels of cooperation with .net; and saying that .net==CLR is simply not true. So, with the definition of .net being fuzzy as it is, what is and what is not .net is solely a matter of labeling, as it is done in Redmond.

This has nothing to do with honesty; it's about marketing ;).

OTOH, the .net label may well be the foot-in-the-door, and help us have the chance to be heard, to get to talk with the prospective customer in the first place. Once in that position, sitting with the customer, honesty is least that needs to be expected. The additional explanation may go along the lines that "the tool we use is not sharing the common runtime the centerpieces of .net use, and the reasons for that..." - and go with the true reasons.

Hey, MS had labeled VB6 as an OOP language, right? There's more .net in VFP than there was OOP in VB6, IMHO.