>>
>Probably already mentioned here, but I didn't see it. There's a new case study in the latest MSDN flash that refers to FoxPro: http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/casestudy.asp?CaseStudyID=14755
>>
>
>Interesting... A case study that highlights migrating from VFP to .NET...
>
>This statement jumped out right away:
>
>CDS wanted to replace Visual FoxPro with a recognized and widely accepted platform.
>
>The conclusion? MS endorses the notion that VFP is not an acceptable platform and that customers would be well served - in the long-run - to migrate.
>
>This statement was also interesting:
>
>The solution: convert AM4 into a Web service, using Microsoft Visual Studio® .NET and the .NET Framework. CDS Chief Architect Bill Sanders, said of the Microsoft .NET-connected solution: "We are amazed at how much a single developer can achieve in a short time using the .NET Framework. It's a truly incredible toolset."
>
>This one is very interesting because it goes directly to what some in the VFP community knock .NET for. Granted - case studies can paint a rosey - overly optimistic picture at times - but that is not the point. The point is that MS indeed does hear and listen to the critiques coming from the VFP community re: .NET. You now see how MS will respond...

Should we be surprised by another marketing ploy to get everybody to jump the old ship and jump on the new (.Net) one ?

Like we're not used to see VFP battered another way.

Is VFP really that bad a development tool? Everywhere? Did'nt you used to say "Think outside the box". Perhaps we don't have the same definition of what's outside that box or maybe what's in it.

I'll take those evaluations seriously when they say when VFP should used instead of .Net and where .Net should be used instead of VFP. I can't believe that .Net is the tool for all jobs. Should'nt we always use the right tool for the right job?