I was making a comment on your statement, not trying to take a personal shot.

I guess it's a difference of opinion, all of these discussions are. I did not ADO.Net as an admission of problems with ADO. I saw it as an improvement. And one that was required to get data connections to the level required for .Net.

There is now a .Net Framework class to attach directly to SQL Server, Oracle, (and if it's not here already, it will be soon) DB 2.

A friend of mine who works at a very large company, one big enough to get some bigwigs from IBM to visit, said that IBM is putting a big effort into working with .Net. They are none to happy with Java for various reasons.

Hopefully, .Net's success will light a fire under Sun. As it seems a lot of Java's current shortcomings are a direct result of Sun being slow to make fixes based on developer requests.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure if you really want to carry on a normal discussion, or if you are looking for minor points to pick apart.

As I've stated before, I'm only hoping that folks here can have intelligent discussions. I would hope these discussions would include sharing experience with using other technologies.

Pf


>>>Today I saw John Ryan make the comment that one of the purposes of .Net was to fix deficiencies in VB. That is a great example of where some attitudes lie here.
>
>But it was MS itself that quoted deficiencies in VB/ADO as a reason for the replacement.
>
>If it fits better for you to present that as an "attitude" by me... go for it.
>
>As for the rest; we deployed our first dotNET server app in May 2002 - yes, 18 months ago. But we still have VFP stuff as well because we judge VFP superior for those parts. And we do not agree that now is a good time for us to embrace dotNET entirely though we understand others who make that choice.
>
>If you can see a problem with this attitude, do say so, I'm always keen to learn.