John, PMFJI

>All Mario concludes is that WinForms run "very very bad" - without much in the way of support. Applying his logic, he must not think much of Fox forms either. Rick concludes that Fox will almost always beat .NET in terms of local performance. All I can tell you is that in terms of a simple test that applied Steve Blacks text example at a Fox devcon a few years ago - .NET actually out performed Fox. The gist of Cetin's comments focus on .Net being "bad at data." My response to that is nonsense. The exact same data-class methodology that Rod and I perfected in Fox and VB - equally applies to .NET. ADO .NET Datasets in fact - area huge improvement over stand-alone ADO Recordsets. In fact, ADO .NET is a better client-side engine than ADO.
>
>It is not that .NET is "bad at data" - its that some have not figured out how to harness its power and to work with data correctly.

The ".Net is bad at data" has been blown out of proportion quite considerably. After requesting data from a source, .Net doesn't handle data, it handles objects which represent the data, .Net is great with objects, hence .Net is great with what we can refer to as data.

However, ADO.Net is (and I have tested to some degree) slower than Fox in processing local "data", it isn't that much slower mind, certainly not enough to sway decisions as to which language to use.

The way I view it is that .Net is more scalable due to the fact that classes represent the data, that, IMO is a huge strength, although it's only my opinion and won't apply to everyone - which I guess is why Fox is preferrable to some and .Net is preferrable to others, depends what app you are developing.

Kev