>>
>After all MSFT as a company isn't about technology, it's about money and one way to keep it rolling in is always push something new and try to force change.
>>
>
>This is an excellent point - but regardless of where MS goes - it is far away from what Fox represents. I agree that there may not be a compelling reason to upgrade to the latest flavor of Office - but I am not sure that logic holds with respect to Fox. Personally, I think .NET is a good technology to invest in. Will .NET be the same 2 years from now than today? Likely - the answer is no. But with that said - I think investments today in .NET can be leveraged tomorrow. I don't think the same is true for Fox. Nonetheless, if you have a solid business model and you are using Fox - and you have a good customer base who does not care about technology specifics - then I believe one can stay in Fox for some time to come.
>
>< JVP >

John,
You're assuming that Windows will be as dominant tomorrow as it is today. .NET is being spun as a good technology for corporate benches. But, Stepford DBAs and C# benchies are not in this for the same reasons as some of us.

There are a lot of security issues and cost issues with the MS Platform. Advocacy is not as it once was. Open Source and Linux look promising and are relatively cost efficient, easy to understand, self healing and well supported.

A configuration with a Windows desktop (X-Windows?), maybe a VFP Front end and a Linux MySQL (or other SQL) backend may look pretty good to those who havent made the fortune 1000 list. It seems like an easy sell.

There is a book, The Earth for Sam. It asks the question:
"What would the world be like if everyone was a barber?"

We'd be well groomed but we'd also risk starvation. Size and market penetration (and even a cable TV network) would not have saved the dinosaur:-). I think I'll have chicken tonight!