>John,
>
>>>The VS.NET team has indirectly allready confirmed that VFP does data best.
>
>>Indirectly???? Where? I think you are making an impermissible inference (and an illogical one at that).
>
>Form VFP home (KenL).
>
>Microsoft does not have plans to merge Visual FoxPro into Visual Studio and .NET, but instead we are working on adding many of the great features found in Visual FoxPro into upcoming versions of Visual Studio, just like we've added great VS features into VFP.
>
>YAG:
>http://blogs.msdn.com/vsdata/archive/2004/06/16/156978.aspx
>
>>OK...you say this in light of not being able to show direct evidence of MS's standpoint.
>
>See above, The ones I could find quickly.
>

That is fine...except that does not mean .NET is inferior to VFP. And...when you read the statement more carefully, it is fairly ambiguous. i.e., you don't know which features will make it in - or to what degree they will make it in - or when they will make it in.

Again, you are hanging your hat on a non-existent hat rack here Walter...


>>No doubt, there are some benefits - in the abatract - as to how VFP works with data. That said, from a PERFORMANCE standpoint - VFP has no material advantage over .NET.
>
>Huh, can you prove that?

Already have...and I believe there are stats on the UT.

>>
I've thrown a dozen examples of how VFP is superiour and you nor anybody else reacted, and now you're asking me for prove ?
>>

That is only your opinion. Running tests that you can run yourself takes it beyond opinion.

Case and point...in your opinion, RV's are superior. From an objective/technical standpoint, although you are entitled to your opinion, it can at best be classifed, as uninformed and unsupported as a best - or even marginally suggested practice.

>>
There is ton's of prove it is far easier to create high performance data processing routines in VFP than in .NET.
>>

Really...where would that be? I understand it that from a VFP perspective - which is very biased - this may appear to be true. Looking at it objectively however, it is anything but true.

And..asuming we are talking about raw data-munging, even if the point were conceded, in the grand scheme of things that the world views as important - raw data munging is not one of them.

Put another way, if 10% of the functionality invovlves data munging, all you have really said is that 10% of the app should stay in Fox - but the other 90% can go to .NET or something else...

Again, you are hanging your hat on a marginally important point...

>
If you'll excuse me, I've got to attend a session with Ken Levy and YAG within a few hours..
>

You along with everyone else who paid the attendence fee....