>
You say "...rarely leads to an optimal choice.". I'm reminded of the saying that goes something like 'let's not let the goal for perfection stand in the way of the very good'.
>

Good point...

>
I really have to ask you just what would be the "optimal" choice for a shop with skilled VFP developers and a successful VFP application suite needing integration with the internet?
>

It depends. About the only thing I can say with certainty is that the optimal choice is not necessarily VFP simply because VFP is already in place.

>
Surely you will not be answering with ASP.NET plus C#/VB.NET plus SQL Server since it remains basically UNPROVEN technology with only glowing POSSIBILITIES as its credentials.
>

Well...they are proven. There is real work going on. Real solutions have been delivered. To say that .NET is unproven is pure FUD. That said, the tools you enumerate may indeed prove to the optimal/correct choice.



>
You say "The real IP value in any app is in what it does - not how it is written.". Clearly, then, a VFP app could easily have a very high IP value just as a VB4 or a C++ app could... and as a .NET app may someday have.
>

Sure, a VFP app could have a lot of value. Realize that its value is derived by what it does - not because it is written in VFP...


>
Finally, I'm having a lot of trouble understanding your statement "Future technology choices OTOH - should be influenced by the specific tools adopted.".
>Can you explain it further. It sure seems backwards to me at this point.

Sure...be happy to...

Companies will make the choice about whether to go to the web. That choice should be influenced by the tools available to get the job done..