>>
>Try to stay focused John. MS is offering two development environments. .Net and VFP
>>Perhaps you forgot but the initial topic was to compare .Net to VFP (MS products). You see that's what happens when you try to take a thread in another direction <g>
>>
>
>I am totally focused Denis. Your goal is a VFP-results oriented outcome to the discussion. As far as the topic is concerned, the thead title says Marketing help on VFP for MS. It says nothing about comparing VFP to .NET. If you are going to lob charges of thread drift my way - you better have your own house in order. I understand in your original message, you ask the question that approaches comparing VFP to .NET. I replied to that direct point.

So you mean to tell me that you always only rely on thread title when replying. Perhaps you have'nt noticed that usually a thread title is merely to indicate, to give a hint about what the thread is all about.

Come on John be serious.


>
>No matter the premise - you want a VFP outcome. Why bother asking the question Denis???
>
>
>
>
>>
>So be it. there are no restrictions on the examples given. I don't mind about the market. If there's one available to me as a developer I'll take it. You see as a consultant I feel that I must advise based on the needs of the business owner and not force to them the latest technology just because it'll be better for my career.
>>
>
>But couldn't one argue that advising clients to stay in VFP is what is actually better for *your* career????

I did'nt say I'd avised the client to go only with VFP. I'm saying that if the client for whatever reasons does'nt want to buy another computer then the options are fairly limited. At that point proposing an application made with VFP makes perfect sense.

>
>Sorry Denis - but you are trying to put a facade on what is truly a disengenous stance on your part...
>
>
>>Whatever but I still don't know the meaning of the word disengenous ;-)
>
>It means that IMO - you are being a bit crafty/deceitful in your point. i.e., the appearance of your argument is one of "the right tool for the job". It is clear however that your attempt is drive and direct the discussion to something that will invariably lead one to conclude Fox is the right tool for the job. I guess if legacy hardware is what you need to work with - then VFP could certainly be a fit. But - so could VB 6, Delphi, etc.
>
>The point Denis is that if you are comfortable with VFP and you can find VFP work - then that is all that should matter.

I could find many arguments in favor of .Net if I worked with it. But I don't. But even if I did do you think that MS needs my help for that <vbg>

You forgot to mention other languages. Java, Cobol, C++, and so many more.

Again what are the development languages still evolving made available by MS beside VFP and .Net?

This thread is about improving the marketing on VFP and then put the information (facts) on MS's site.

It's that simple. In what situations is VFP better than .Net?

So far we've seen examples of why a business would want to go from VFP to .Net. Why can't we have the oppsite?