SNIP
>
>The point still stands: True .Net development tools such as VB.net, C#, (even COBOL.Net) deal in CLR managed code, and they offer deep integration with the framework's extensive object library. VFP 8 doesn't. I'm not here to argue whether that makes VFP superior or inferior to the .net tools. I am arguing that it makes VFP _different_ from the .Net tools, and therefore VFP 8 should not be named VFP.Net.

Jeremy,

But what about a "VFP for .NET" moniker? Surely VFP's gotta be as much 'for .NET' as Office.NET is going to be "pure" .NET.

By the way, Microsoft has NOT (anywhere that I've seen) said they are planning any name change for VFP. I suspect you are basing uour assertion on the "survey" on the UT's main page. The survey is strictly a UT initiative (at least as I understand it) at this point.

cheers