Can you provide more information on those moves from .net to another technology?

>I am totally with you on that - not every user is a fortune 50 shop with an IT department longing for the buffet line at MS .NET seminars.
>
>The apps I've seen are clunkers - some projects are moving back to layered solutions after several years and several million feeding .NET certified benchies.
>
>>Hi
>>Strange! To give up the power and responsiveness of a desktop application for WEB pages seems a bad decision to me, specially for an intranet with not so many users and good server.
>>If this is the future, then what about 'no touch deployment' in .NET (rich client with the Internet serving as transport mechanism) ?
>>
>>This guy I believe is right:
>>http://www.pantos.org/atw/perspectives/0203.html
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>This morning I had to hear yet another reason why everybody should migrate to dotNET.
>>>
>>>Deployment.
>>>
>>>Deployment? Yes! There is a new corporate decision in one of my clients that no software (i.e. applications) should be installed in a user's PC.
>>>
>>>I argued that *all* my applications don't reside in user's PCs and that there is no install routines whatsoever in order for a user to use *any* of my applications (all .exe reside in specific server's directories, and .ini files and dbfs as well). All that should be done is to create a shortcut in user's PC desktop to start the program and, if that's the case, configure an ODBC connection if the app needs to access an SQL backend. Aha!!! so you *must* install something in a user's PC!
>>>
>>>I also presented the WTS option. NO! All should be done via "web" access (i.e. using a browser) and *all* apps should be web applications, accessed by and running under a browser, and... it should be developed in dotNET!
>>>
>>>That's all.
>>>
>>>Thanks for your time reading this message
>>>
>>>Fernando

*******************************************************
Save a tree, eat a beaver.
Denis Chassé