>
Sure, .NET has advantages too in this area, but of course how often do you need such background processing job ? And if you really need it, would starting a seperate process not be a solution too, though it is not as *CLEAN* as a multi threading option. TO be honest, for the average and even advanced VFP application developer I don´t see much value in this argument.
>

Consider this - you want to run a series of reports to pdf, html, etc. You want to kick off the jobs and continue on with what you are currently doing. Can you do this in Fox? Yes. But is it as clean or straight forward as simply spawning a new thread? No - not even close.

I think this is where you miss the point. The issue is not whether Fox (or more generically a specific tool) can do a task. Rather, the issue is how efficiently can it be done. The myth perpetuated that Fox requires a few lines of code to many lines in .NET is nothing but a myth. Take two business objects - one in Fox and one in .NET - and I'll bet the lines of code will be roughly the same. As it has been pointed out, there will be scnearios where Fox will require less lines and .NET will require less lines. Where there is the ability on each side to do a task, in the end it all evens out.

The real issue is where Fox hits the wall - where it is simply not capable of performing a task. There are numerous instances of these scenarios and they are not likely to change.


>
As I expressed before, I find the data munging capabilities of .NET just terrible because of the absense of a local dataengine, which is esspecially important to me when writing advanced desktop applications.
>

Why don't you just say that you find the data munging capabilities in .NET just terrible because it is not like Fox. That is what you are really saying. You and I have debated this before - but in fact - ADO .NET has a local data engine (I can open up local cursors all without being connected to a data store. I can sort, query, etc.... ADO .NET has a local data engine component.). This pretty much shows the flaw in your assumption above. This is why I contend what you are really saying is that data munging in .NET is terrible because it is not like Fox - and not because it lacks a local data engine - because it does not.


>
I don´t want to manually iterate through collections of ADO.NET to mung my data, nor do I want to use an external source for it (SQL server) for network load abnd performance reasons. In what respect: what does .NET have to offer me. Virtually nothing....
>

It is an interesting comment becasue iterating through collections means you are working with objects - something Fox developers claim they like to do. Again, you like and love the VFP cursor (and with good reason I might add). I am not slamming you for it. All I am doing here is drawing out the true nature of your comments. You - like many Fox developers - only evaluate .NET through Fox-Colored glasses. Comparing and evaluating development tools is a difficult job.

I am not saying you will or should be a .NET lover - I really do not care if and when you ever decide to adopt .NET. If you stay in Fox for the next 6 years or so - that is entirely up to you. There are those here though - that are making serious and important decisions concerning .NET - and this gets to why I write what I write.

The bottom line Walter is that those like you - who profess to have evaluated .NET and have concluded that it has nothing to offer - have given .NET short shrift. And - there are those who just might take what you have to say seriously - which would be a shame. That said, if those same people still decided to stick with Fox - I would respect that and consider it a good decision - if and only if their decision was an informed decsion. I will say that if they only get one side of the story - from people like you - and further - and inaccurate side of the story - then their decision is anything but informed.

I know this is likely an excercise in futility on my part because no matter what somebody says about .NET - your knee jerk reaction is to say that you can do that in Fox - or that it can be simulated. At some point, you might just realize that all the work arounds and simulations is nothing more than putting the square peg in the round hole.