>It was the the question 'how does a product "do" data?' that I was asking about. That doesn't strike you as unnecessary nitpicking?

Hi, Mike. First, let me say that I respect you and your opinion. I can see now how you might find *that* question (as opposed to the question I took from it, which was "*how* does VFP do data best?") nitpicking, but I don't. To me (just IMO), that statement about a product "doing data best" seems to imply that other tools somehow don't allow me to do at least some portion of the things with data that VFP does allow. Or at least that some portion of these data functions are performed "better" in VFP, in which case I do think a nice bulleted list of those ways would be nice to see.

I find nothing in .Net WRT data that cannot be done, nor that cannot be done well. As a long-time Fox/VFP developer, do I run into things that I have to figure out how to do in dotnet? Absolutely. Not only with "doing data" but every facet of development. Thinking back to circa 1990, I recall that I was going through a learning curve with FoxPro 2.x, having come from a background of working with Fortran, COBOL, RPG II and then MS Professional Basic 6.0 and 7.0 [sic], which was the product that preceded VB. At that point, until I had gotten a few Fox apps out the door, I'm pretty sure I would have told a person or 2 or 3 that those other tools "did" many things better than FoxPro. That only would have been because I was used to the other tools and I had not yet embraced and fully comprehended FP 2.x.

I suppose my point here, which I *think* at least somewhat agrees with JVP's point, is that it's easy for those of us who have used FP/VFP for years to take a cursory (no pun intended <s>) look at other tools or to read what others have written about those other tools and then dismiss them as being inferior to our old favorite hammer. It's only natural and I don't really fault anyone for falling into that. Nor do I feel that everyone here should set aside VFP and jump into dotnet. VFP has plenty of life left for many types of applications. But neither do I feel that those of us who have used Fox/VFP for years and dotnet either barely or not-at-all-ly should express opinions that VFP is so much better -- without being able to express how/why that's the case.

I'm also not picking on Craig -- it could just as easily have been me who said "VFP does data best." I know it's a severe minority opinion, however I THANK JVP for asking these types of questions and, though I am familiar with his history here (and elsewhere in the fox fora), I believe that the majority reacts to each of his posts before even really reading them to see that some or many (of his posts) can cause at least some of us to grow a bit in our thinking (again, just MHO, of course).

>As far as can VFP do data the best, if that was the only question asked I wouldn't have said anything. Its a subjective answer,
>unless objective criteria can be provided; Craig seems to think it is. Personally, I agree. That there is concern over this opinion
>being expressed in a VFP forum is comical, don't you think?

I suppose so -- yes, why wouldn't at least most of the folks who frequent this forum feel that VFP is the best tool hands down? Yet, like JVP (I think), I would hate to see that bias cause some to say things in a negative light about any alternative tools that some may then take as gospel and then (a) not explore and (b) pass along as more gospel. Even if VFP does somehow "do data" better than dotnet, it seems to me that just about no developer is doing him/herself or his/her career (perhaps unless close to retirement) any favors by not getting his/her hands at least a little dirty with dotnet.

>Anyways, to answer your question, why do I think VFP does data best?
>
>Because its very simple to create a large database application and very simple to create a small database application. The syntax doesn't require a prohibitive object model, and deployment issues are a snap since you're just copying files and metadata. No server software or hardware. For my data uses, I think VFP's the best.

That last statement is about the only one I can agree with, simply because you qualify it with "for [your] data uses." Only you know what's best for your apps. Personally, I have not developed an app that uses Fox data or views for several years. The apps on which I've been working tend to have requirements for built-in database server features such as security and online transaction logging for replication to redundant servers for disaster recovery and backups, etc. That only makes VFP not the best data repository for *my* apps, of course, though I *have* used the VFP language and tools plus SPT access to the data -- mostly because I know VFP better than any other tool and I want to build apps with the tool in which I am proficient, at least while I learn to be proficient with dotnet as well. And yes, I do understand the distinction between VFP as a data repository and VFP as a data acccess tool. Yet I say again that I'm really only using VFP for the latter because it's the tool with which I'm currently most proficient and my employer/customers pay me because of my proficiency -- i.e., I don't use it because I feel that it "does data," or anything necessarily, better than the other tools from which I could choose.

Thanks for your reply, Mike. I was really just trying to get a sense for how VFP, from a technical standpoint or whatever, works with data better, or perhaps makes working with data easier, than dotnet. I still don't really have that answer, however your "doesn't require a prohibitive object model" does get close to what I had assumed. I had been assuming that "VFP does data better" really boils down to the commands and functions (USE, views, TABLEUPDATE, BROWSE, INDEX, etc, etc, etc) that are available in VFP and not directly available in dotnet. That's analogous, I think, to what I was saying earlier about 1990 and me learning Fox after having used those dinosaur tools (NOTE: I'm calling *those* tools fossils; I'm not at all implying that VFP fits into that category, thanks <s>) to develop database apps. Fox just didn't "do" the things that I need to do in the same ways that I had done them in the past, so it seemed inferior to me for some time period. Then it got better -- much better <s>. If that's not really what's happening here when people say that VFP does data (or anything else) better than dotNet, my apologies. Me thinks, however, that in a nutshell, that's it.

Kelly