Hi Al,
>Hi Jim,
>
>Before I start, let me state that I don't agree with everything JVP says and the tone in which he sometimes attempts to make his points/arguements.
>
>However, in this thread I've noticed that JVP has questioned people who knock .NET by making blanket statements that simply are not true.

Really... I've been through all of JVP's responses of this thread and I don't se ANY serious response. Certainly none having the calibre of 'proof' that he himself demands whenever someone says, in whichever thread, 'VFP is good at...' or 'VFP can do most any business app...' or such simple stuff!
JVP like to say that's what he's doing, but in fact all hes doing is spreading FUD.

Now, as to the rest of your comments, I have absolutely no problem. I am surprised that you have clients ASKING for re-writes in .NET but, hey, I don't profess to know everything that is going on.
Here in Toronto VFP has been in the sahpe you describe for Manitoba for a very long time now - basically since days after the Gartner pronouncement way back when. After that I spent over 5 years doing AS/400 stuff to keep bread on the table.
Now I must admit to being peeved when people who have barely dented some product pronounce it as the be all and end all. Especially given the history of .NET is its short life so far! And that "Case Study" that MS published was the most bush-league thing I've ever seen from MS, and if that's where they've got to go to dredge up "success" stories then it sure looks like they have serious problems!
I figure that .NET will succeed... someday. But I am really really bothered that one technique they are using is to slam other of their own products - VFP in the case study cited earlier. Why MS feels that it has to steamroll .NET over everything is way beyond me. MS is even on record as planning to after small/medium businesses and they claim that these are the ones of 5,000-8,000 employees. Don't they realize that there are tons and tons of 1-1,000 employee businesses out there that need applications but don't need web access and web services and SQL Server and managed code and ...????

Jim

>
>I've seen a number of posts where individuals have knocked .NET for this reason or that reason. Having used VFP for a number of years, VB6 for a couple and .NET/SQL Server almost exclusively the last 18 months - I really think there is very, very little (if anything) that can be done in Fox that can't be done in .NET in one way or another....
>
>The choice of developer tool is all a matter of preference as far as I'm concerned - and my preference is to be employed - and in Manitoba no one has seen a fox in some time ... that's just the reality around these parts.
>
>So I make a living now developing .NET/SQL Server apps. For those of you that have clients who have no preference for the dev tools you use - all the power to you. There's no doubt that VFP is a great development tool - but it isn't the "be all and end all". At one time I thought it was - now I know differently.
>
>I have clients specifically requesting that apps to be written in .NET. Many of these are re-writes of VB5 and VB6 apps (there are a ton of these apps out there) that require enhanced functionality and a move to SQL Server from Access MDB's.
>
>Al
>
>
>>In these alleged replies that JVP has made, the MOST I have seen him write is little quips like 'a myth' or 'not true'. He simply expects us to take his word on these matters, all the while never accepting ANY words pro-VFP by ANYONE!
>>
>>It is JVP who has the problem here, BOb, not anyone else! And if Jos' idea could be followed up by JVP then maybe, just maybe, we could have an END to JVP's eternal incessant rantings about VFP's future being limited. He just doesn't seem to get it... WE'VE HEARD IT AND WE DON'T PARTICULARLY CARE AND WE WILL WORY ABOUT OURSELVES.
>>
>>Jim
>>>
>>>BOb