John,
In most cases the improvements from VFP to .NET are only incremental, not earth-shattering. Web apps are a good example. .VFP. mtdll web apps using no commercial 3rd party software can easily handle over 5 million hits a day. Yes, if you're building an Amazon or Ebay, I too would recommend ASP.NET because you would need that incremental boost.
The reality is that some developers are going to .NET because they possibly see more opportunities using it or they see the possibility of generating more business by rewriting old .vfp. apps in C#.
On the other hand, many other vfp developers don't need the ".NET strategy" to help sell their products. The clients don't really care what it's written in as long as it satisfies their needs. In other words, they're free to concentrate on what the product actually does rather feel the need to hype it up on the latest technology coming out of Redmond...

>
>Of course not - nor should he. For one thing - he has a product - with a large install base - that he continually improves and sells. But the bottom line is this - if you have a web app to do - where 5 years ago the call would be WW - I think today Rick would quite likely recommend ASP .NET.
>
>Perhaps defend was the wrong word. Perhaps I should have said recommend instead.
>
>
>>
>A few of these GURU had to move on because they found other 'Challenges' which in most cases do not have anything to do with building applications directly anyways.
>>
>
>It is more than a few Walter... And - does it really matter why they have moved on. The question you have to ask is why did they move on.
>
>>
>They mostly are suppliers of some tools or frameworks (McNeish, RickS) who found that is more buisiness opportunity in the .NET world (because it is new ?).
>>
>
>There is more of a business opportunity in .NET for many other reasons than just being new...
>
>>
>How does this imply that they don't "defend" VFP as a valid tool for application development.
>>
>
>Well Walter - it implies a lot of things when vendors move on to other technologies.
>
>
>>
>I don't know about any former VFP Guru not defending the tool anymore. The fact is, that if my VFP buisiness dries out, I'll have to look for something else to do, but this not mean I won't defend VFP as a valid tool. In fact I don't see any better tool for the things I'm doing right now.
>>
>
>As I said - defend is probably the wrong word. I think you will find that when push comes to shove - those that have moved on will likely recommend .NET over VFP. Seriously, ask Kevin. He has a new framework to sell. Given the choice between VFP and .NET - what do you think he is going to recommend.