Hi John,
I think the issue is that, with this Case Study, Microsoft made VFP look bad really just to make .NET look good. The corresponding issue is if this is proper behavior for Microsoft. The article itself didn't seem to have any technical merit which only made it appear much worse in the eyes of the technical people here.
>>
>Yeah except for the small fact that this is essentially a pro VFP forum and is why pro VFP developers hang out here talking about and trying to promote VFP. Which is also, incidentally, another way of showing MS that a large and positive community exists for VFP.
>>
>
>What does that have to with the possibility of a VFP .NET? Regardless of whether one is squarely behind VFP - VFP .NET is a bad idea - and would be a poor investment. It is interesting you sent this comment to me - considering I am not the only one to say this. How about Bill Sanders? He has poo-poo'd the idea of a VFP .NET as well - as have many others.
>>
>
>>
>Your argument, which you have made in several posts, that members here only complain when something is anti-VFP but not when it’s anti-something else is pointless simply because this is a pro-VFP forum.
>>
>
>Admitting this is the first step to recovery...< bg >... Here is a question -what if something is "anti-VFP" in your opinion - but is nonetheless a valid technical statement? I guess in your opinion - it gets suppressed for no other reason than this is a "pro-VFP" forum.
>
>>
>If an article, or case study, or whatever, is derogatory to Delphi, or SQL, or whatever then I am sure that in the pro-Delphi forum, or pro-SQL forum, or pro-whatever forum you will find people complaining about it and defending their chosen development tool. What do you expect to have happen here? One definition of insanity is to keep on doing the same thing but expecting different results!
>>
>
>Not sure about that. For one thing - I don't think you will find a "community" like this in the Delphi, SQL Server, etc - developer bases. Second - your assumption is the article was derogatory to VFP. It was a .NET case study - and the company largely migrated from VFP. Are you going to go after every case study like this? I am not sure if Ken is going to be able to "sanitize" every case study for the sole purpose of preventing you and others from being "offended". One getting personally offended when the development tool is what is being talked about is absurd.
>
>
>
>>
>I have worked with many developers in my time and all of those who had made a significant investment in time and energy in learning their development tool became passionate about their choice.
>>
>
>Perhaps some in the VFP world. You won't find a rabid bunch like this outside the VFP world. I suppose you could argue that some in the VB world got up in arms over .NET - but that died out fairly quickly - and it certainly did not get to the levels they get to here.
>
>>
>All of them would defend their chosen language against criticism and attack. That is human nature and that is what makes for a great community.
>>
>
>Great is not the word that comes to mind... Seriously, think about what you are saying here... Defending a language against criticism and attack? No - this is not human nature.
>
>>
>And that, by the way, is the very thing that every product manufacturer, including MS, would like to create around their product. So what?
>>
>
>You are wrong there... What MS wants is brand loyalty. Do you think the situation with Fox is something that MS likes? Look at what some in the VB world had to say toward .NET. Did that stop MS? No, it did not.
>
>You are confusing brand loyalty with fanatisism...