>I think that VFP is much easier to understand than FP2.x, partly because I never liked the foundation read, which wasn't well documented, partly because the object model seems more consistent and comprehensive than the old "snippets". Of course, I never knew as much about old FP as I now know about VFP.
>
>If VFP has lost customers, I think M$ Access might be the main reason. Not only is it a much easier entry-level tool, but it is a part of M$ Office Professional, which was displacing WordPerfect and Lotus at about the same time that VFP came out. Also, it was at that time that Access95 came out, making Access more like a professional tool.


I dunno about Access...I don't know a lot of people who fled to Access...a lot went to Delphi, PB, and VB. But the paradigm shift represented by VFP 3.0 was staggering no matter how well you knew old FP or FPW. The only people who had a good jumpstart on it were early beta-testers (longer learning curve -- that was how I got the jump on it), and people who were well versed in both Fox and OOP...there were not many like that at the time.

Just my opinion.