Yeah - that's the guy.

About 3-4 Hours for the "framework". I just pasted together some "simple" classes I had in my "toolbox" to do it.

The article that the "framework" was included with as "source code" was the real "b*tch" - about 32 (maybe longer) hours.

One thing I learned from the project - I pasted UT member banners into a edit / memo service to add the data. I noticed that the alphabet symbol sets translated "literally" - and so did the WingDings!. I don't know why - but that surprised me.

In Cetin's record, the characters are a different symbol set than, say, from Tasker's record.


>I haven't really been following this, but is the app you are talking about the RIO framework download? If so, how long did that take to write?
>
>Kev
>
>>A few months back a simple challenge was proposed to a few .NET advocates [evangelicals] on this board. The .NET advocates are really not so much advocates for .NET, as they are just against VFP. Real .NET players are on the .NET forum asking questions and solving technical issues and writing code - not attempting to brow beat VFP.
>>
>>The challenge was simple. Download a little VFP Active X demo (less than ten controls - 1 form, 1 treeview, 1 tool bar and 2 DBFs and develop a similar (or comprable) .NET demo project. I was really interested in seeing the results.
>>
>>After several months, and, I assume several discussions amongst the PA .NET evangelical group, I was told they couldn't do it. The excuses were, as expected, characteristic for a zero effort attempt.
>>
>>I must add that I have not seen a VFP project from [any of] the PA .NET evangelicals. If they do write VFP projects - they may be of the genre of old school consultants: Modal Forms, with Page Frames, and grids on every page - but - I do not know - none has posted a VFP solution.
>>
>>At any rate, here is where VFP beat .NET, if you follow their reasoning in the Thread:
>>
>>On Speed:
>>"My power user does not care if he sees an mouse pointer (hour glass). This was part of the challenge.
>>
>>Comment: Developers should pride themselves in making their apps quick (i think). It's not what the user allows, but what our professional work ethic, or a desire to be the best, demands of us.
>>
>>On scalability:
>>.NET, it appears, is not scalable. Its not made for mom `n pop house keeping development. VFP can do both mom `n pop, as well as enterprise. .NET works best in System Shops (or so it seems!) that contract armies of underskilled developers/evangelicals to book a lot of time for those big corporate IT managers dancing to the MS party line (fear sells!).
>>
>>On why they couldn't deliver the demo:
>>1) "I only work for money"
>>
>>2) "The [demo] project is sub standard" - I loved this one! What does that mean? It was a "demo" project that is downloadable ( 32KB zip file - what did they expect - a bloated pig!). At least they didn't say "The sun was in my eyes", "I had a flat tire", "The bus was late", "I had a hemmoroid flareup". So be it - they couldn't do it - and thats the bottom line!
>>
>>Maybe - if these guys spent more time on a .NET forum, they could have asked some questions and moved the project forward and impressed us all.
>>
>>So - to all you .NOT / anti VFP evangelists - pray for surf - we already got SEX (Syntactically Explicit Xbase)!
>>
>>
>>Rotate this label on your sugar plumb, JB!!