John,
thanks, good points- I think we're back to the original subject...

>
>I still like working with VFP myself. The issue has to do with research and innovation. The best and brightest tend to be at the forefront of this and it is an essential ingredient for a successful language. The fact is - there is little cutting edge work going on today relative to 5-7+ years ago. My opinion is more macro and less into specific people. Some of the best developers I have met are people that never subscribed to a magazine, never attended a devcon, etc. In other words - they are not part of the community.
>
>I understand where Rick Strahl is coming from - although I don't agree with all of his assessments of .NET. I understand his opinions carries a lot of weight. It should - he as a lot of credibility. In his critiques of .NET, I don't agree with his assesment that .NET lacks a local data engine. ADO .NET is a local engine and it is quite flexible. But like Rick - that is just one person's opinoin. It is totally accurate to say that ADO .NET is not like VFP - which is the gold standard that many here hold .NET to.
>
>Yes - VFP's local engine is nice - especially because it is tightly integrated with the language. However, that ironically is also one of VFP's weaknesses. IMO - the integration has crippled the ability of some to think in any other way. That is just my opinion and the way I see it.