>>Well Rick, I would disagree in part. To a VFP-die hard cheerleader - it is indeed a competition in their mind. At some point, these people will realize that being pro-.NET does not equate to being anti-VFP.
>>
>SNIP
>
>John,
>
>This is where you grossly mis-represent the "issue".

>
Mine, and I dare so most others who try to dialog with you on the matter, is the position that VFP is nowhere near "dead" while .NET is still very early in its development cycle.
>


It is interesting that on one hand, you say I "grossly" misrepresent the issue - and yet on the other hand, you present the aforementioned statement as your "position". What precisely are you arguing Jim? Are you arguing that VFP is nowhere near dead BECAUSE .NET is early in its development cycle? FWIW, I don't think a cause-effect relationship exists. i.e., VFP's place in the world stage of I/T would be materially the same whether or not .NET existed.

Again Jim, what precisely are you arguing here?


>
YOU consistently repeat that "VFP has no future" and ".NET is where everyone should be going" and variations on those themes.
>

VFP has "a" future - to the extent that you will see at least 1 more version and that it will be supported. From a macro perspective - that is the future I see - and that is all I see. I don't see VFP fitting into the present and future directions of MS. I don't see VFP all of a sudden, being a "go to" product for mission critical apps. That is the way I see it. Sorry if that conflicts with your world view.

>
It is always YOU who makes it look like a "competition" and in using the words you do you denigrate everyone who continues to use - and want to use - VFP for the products they deliver to their customers.
>

I continue to use Fox. That right there pretty much defeats your point here.


>
Many have told you that THIS IS A VFP FORUM. As such do you really expect people who are very skilled with the product and who are delivering applications to their users to simply fold up their VFP tent and erect a .NET tent????
>

Jim, you selectively pick your battles. Did Rick not just tell you to "get off your high horse"... Why don't you take him to task over that comment?


>
You can call them "mom and pop shops" if you like, but Microsoft is quoted as categorizing companies with 'around 8,000 or more employees' as the "small to medium sized business category". This leaves PLENTY of room for VFP in all companies that have less than 8,000 employees.
>

It all works in theory Jim. A company with 7,999 employees is IMO - a significantly sized company. I theory, there is plenty of room for VFP. In fact, it is far more often than not - not on the radar screen of most I/T decision makers.

>
I'm sure you can agree that the number of companies below the 8,000 employee mark FAR OUTNUMBER those with 8,000+ employees. Not a bad market, wouldn't you say???
>

Perhaps...but markets are not defined solely by employee count. What the company does is far more dispositive as to what market it occupies.

>
And that market, at least at this time and as things are packaged today, cannot afford the costs, both initial and on-going, of multiple servers and SQL Server licenses and the support required for all that.
>

Too sweeping of a statement to make Jim. One of my clients only has 20 or so employees and they have SQL Server with mirroring and a hot-stand by box. What you cite is more function of sales volume than employee size.


>
The early adoptors of .NET (I call them the pioneers) surely believe that .NET is already "here" and is the platform for the future. And I think they are probably correct in their prognosis for the future, but far less so as to if now is the time or not. But that doesn't make VFP a 'has-been'.
>

You see...you are arguing the whole "pro .net means anti vfp" line...

>
Summing up... this "competition" that you see is the direct result or your consistent and repeated assertion that VFP is dead and that .NET is the only direction.
>

Actually Jim, I don't see any competition at all...


>
People who hear that over and over and over again and again and again from YOU any time someone says anything the least bit positive about VFP in threads having nothing to do with the future of VFP are going to challenge you!
>

Where do I respond to somebody just for saying something positive about VFP? I may respond when somebody suggests a course of action based on a pereceived benefit of VFP - but that is a different matter altogether.


>
YOU consider YOURSELF a great debater and seem to enjoy the repetition. In fact any one who reads your points quickly sees that you have NO debating skill whatsoever, most typically diverting attention to some picayune statement and picking away at that instead of sticking to the issue at hand.
>

And you...the guy who opens up his reponse to me by stating that he is not making a specific argument...but yet concludes by making that argument.

>
Anyone who sticks with you through such drivel lets us all eventually see the childishness of your behaviour.
>

And finally...we do get to your personal attacks...


>
Yes, you've got a handful of 'supporters' and they keep you going and going and going. That you have MAINLY detractors has no impact on you and in fact you (as only you can do) turn it into a positive by citing that you must be doing something right to have so many detractors.
>

Sure...because people like you - whether you realize this or not - end up contradicting yourself...


>
It is YOU who makes this look like any kind of "competition". Most everyone else is confident that VFP and .NET can and will coexist for SEVERAL YEARS TO COME.
>

Well if you are that confident, then there is no reason for you to respond to me....is there?????


>>
Most everyone else acknowledges that they likely will have to come aboard with .NET some time in the future. But you TELL us all, time and time again, that we are stupid because we should already be on the .NET bandwagon.
>>

Where did I call somebody stupid? Indeed, I have been critical of people who continually ask the question "why oh why won't MS market VFP". Or, "Lets come up with a plan to help MS market VFP." Jim...keep in mind that Ken Levy himself responded to Denis Chasse on that very topic - telling Denis that posts like his do more harm than good. I believe Ken has been somewhat critical of you as well.

At some point - when and if you can reduce the amount of "defensiveness" in your posts, maybe you read with some objectivity.