>It isn't that. It is I'm just terrified of having to rely on other programmers. I don't like feeling dependent upon people when it is my butt if something doesn't get done. I do feel like I'm at the mercy of the framework's architect whim and desire. I mean, if the architect only has 20 users then you have a say. If the architect has 2000 users, and decide to modify something that you use it can be a headache.
>
>Even if you have that layer, between you and the framework there is still that potential it can totally mess up something. I have that same fear from Microsoft, but really helpless.. unless I didn't want to use .NET. But there are open source implementations of it as well.
>
>I really don't know if Kevin is respondsive to his customers or not. From the customer loyalty, he sure must be because of all the comments in here.
>With a commerical framework, it just feels like another person that could potential cause you serious headaches. I don't know about you, but I've had tons of people who have caused me headaches when they are in the position.
>

Well, now we're getting somewhere... or maybe that's just because I agree with virtually everything you've just said! Oops... almost forgot my <g> ]:)

The reasons you point out are exactly why anyone considering whether to "roll their own" or purchase a commercial framework needs to carefully investigate the ones available to determine which (if any) meet their business' needs.

BTW, another concern none of us mentioned is the people responsible for the framework coding. The design may be a piece of art, suitable for hanging... but you may find yourself wanting to do the same to the chief architect(s)!

When you think about it, it's like adding another person to your project. You should take to the time to "interview" the framework as you would a prospective employee... a very important employee.
---J