John,

Happy New Year, BTW!

>Material in terms of market dynamics? I doubt it. Too often, technical issues are somehow conflated with business/marketing issues. I don't question for one moment - the techncial effacacy of VFP/WW. But as you say - it would only be of interest to EXISTING Fox Shops.

I did NOT say it would only be of interest to existing Fox Shops. I said that it's a very good solution for Fox shops.

>On a related note - driving technology choices based on the implementation of a current code-base - IMO - rarely yields an optimal choice. The choice may be good enough - which is usually what will fit the bill - but it won't be optimum.

Optimal from a technical point of view is dependent on the specific facts of the project, including size and complexity of app, volume of hits, and many other variables. Choices based on the current code-base can often yield a very optimal choice, depending on how you (or the person paying the bills) weight the various factors for that particular project.

Development decisions often are made ONLY on technical points of view without properly weighing all the trade-offs, including cost of development. Projects often fail because the latest and greatest platform or products are selected without proper consideration of all the factors.

A solution that as you say will "fit the bill" and comes in on time and within budget and is easily maintained may very well surpass the optimal choice you refer to, making it the real optimal choice.

>The real IP value in any app is in what it does - not in how it is written. Future technology choices OTOH - should be influenced by the specific tools adopted.

I agree that it is wise to keep an eye on the future when assessing platform and tool choices and that the real value is in what the app does. However, I do believe that "how it is written" can also bring considerable value to the table (or save considerable value from going down the drain). In the case of existing code-base, you really cannot apply one standard across the board, but must assess each situation individually. In many cases, Fox with WC wins easily from a technical (the app does what it is supposed to do) and a budget (use what we know and leverage what we have, often through quickly encapsulating the existing stuff into a better, more flexible design) point of view.