Mike,

I think Access because it is bundled with Office, it is viewed a bit more favorably by IT managers than VFP for workgroup applications. More IT professionals seem to be able to seperate Access the database from Access the query tool in their mind than with VFP. Also, in the low to mid-range vertical market there are perhaps more Access solutions with source code than anything.

One big problem is that the VFP community tends to defend the DBF format past common sense which ruins credibility with IT professionals who know better. Instead of admitting that SQL Server or Oracle is better for security and reliability you have VFP developers confusing the issue by stubbornly pushing DBF. In my opinion they are not doing VFP community any favors because they contribute to the myth that VFP = DBF.

While there are definitely IT professionals that say VFP is over, they are mostly ignorant on VFP's strengths as a front end to Oracle or SQL Server. Either that or they are they type of person that thinks the only tool worth using is the most popular one.

With AccPac dropping their Executive series built on Powerbuilder and upscaling Pro Series on VFP to use Oracle, DB2, or SQL Server, I doubt VFP will be going away anytime soon. There is no commercial .NET or VB source code accounting system that comes close to SBT/AccPac's install numbers. If AccPac moves to .NET for future Pro Series, all bets are off. But until then VFP wins some of the best installs in mid-level companies. AccountMate, also built on VFP, also has tens of thousands of installs as well.

I can remember 15 years ago people telling me RPG was done and that you can forget about AS400/System 38 work. Yet just the other day I had someone asking me if I knew any RPG programmers. In many ways VFP is where RPG was 15 years ago. It's getting a solid niche in source code accounting and nobody is going to re-write all that code overnight.

Nothing right now is an easy no-brainer decision. Microsoft has fractured the VB/C++ market with .NET. I know many VB shops that have not even started with .NET yet. It's a huge learning curve and many have yet to take the leap. The programming methodology is so different that applications pretty much have to be re-designed from the ground up to use .NET effectively.

Evenutally most will use .NET and it would be strong right now for new ground up projects. The problem is finding a breadth of vertical appliations in .NET that provide source code that are available today. Even in HR, which is not even vertical, none of the big players have .NET source code solutions.

Also with Linux gaining strength many IT shops are going to be looking for solutions that allow them a play in that market as well. There are surely many IT professionals who would question a .NET decision as much as VFP because you are locking yourself into Microsoft for your tool.

So even though VFP is not going to jump up and be the most popular tool, no matter which tool you choose there are plenty of IT 'professionals' that will tell you it is the wrong direction.

I've learned to not worry much about what everyone else is using and focus on the business solution. If you're in a situation where they don't respect your decision to use VFP for the solution, there wasn't much respect in the first place. If you focus on the solution and it's success with other customers (IE AccPac Pro Series), the executives don't care what language it's written in as long as your system does the job.

Greg



>Hi John
>
>>To many - VFP is not a sustainable and contemporary platform. Does this come as a shock to you Mike?
>
>No. This comes as no shock to me.
>
>You did not address the issue I raised in my reply to Rod. What is the current "sustainable and contemporary platform"? Is it VB and Access? Access seems to have better tools for building queries than VFP's View Designer. Is that the primary reason to use it as a data store. Isn't Access data as susceptible to corruption as DBF files?