While I would agree that specific tactics of what will be in place 5/10 years from now are hard to predict, I think it is safe to say that certain strategies and methodolgies will be. Specifically, it is clear that for some time, software companies have been moving AWAY from the pc-based computing arena that dominated the late 80's to the mid-90's. That is the 10 year period where PC's dominated - where x-base languages where in their prime. From the mid-90's until today, the world of components took off and matured. In this second 10 year period, the foundations of what the next 10 year period has to offer were set in place. Anybody who was paying attention at the 1993 FoxPro Devcon-Keynote saw the writing on the wall. And certainly, by 1998 - with the advent of the Internet in full swing, if it was not clear where things were headed 5 years prior - it was in 1998. That was the year I asked Bill Gates the famous question re: the future of Visual FoxPro. Hard to believe, but that was almost 7 years ago.

I find it interesting - the number of nay-sayers in the Fox ranks who continue to sit on the sidelines - waiting for all of the innovations of today to fail. You do realize that is a lousy criteria upon which to base a technology choice on...right??? In effect, the argument is "I am sticking with Fox becuase the new stuff is not proven, it is likely to fail, and Fox will be there to pick up the pieces..." Simply put, that is not going to happen.

Fox is at least a generation behind the state of the art. There are so many innovations today that make life easier for a developer that Fox is not capable of doing. And if that is not bad enough, there are things Visual Basic could do 7 years ago that made life easier that Fox still cannot do today. After all this time, Fox still cannot fully interoperate with the Windows API nor can it fully support event-driven application development. And compared to the state of the art today, its implementation of OO - while good in 1995 - has too many short-comings today.

If all you care about is building simple order entry apps that will run on a few PC's - then I suppose Fox will still be a viable alternative. However, given the state of the art - that does not seem terribly exciting to me. And while one can make a living with that kind of work, it pales in comparision to the financial opportunties that exist when you have .NET, Java, SQL Server, Oracle, etc. in your toolbox. Those that embraced other technologies years ago - like VB , SQL Server, etc. - got the message and are reaping the rewards today.

As each year goes by, Devcon Pictures look more like an AARP/Grey Panther convention. It is an accurate metaphor re: the role Fox has today in the world of computing.

Finally, I tend to get fairly aggressive and abrasive with my comments because of the type of comments you make re: .NET being .NOT - and the nay saying that goes on with that. If that is really the case, then why are there many more Fox developers leaning .NET than there are developers learning Fox??????


Prediction, by 2014, it will be several years since the the last version of Fox shipped.

John






>>Like it or not however, it is almost never in a firm's best interest - in the intermediate to long term - which is definitely in your 5 year plan - to stick with Fox. In spite of what some may say here, that is an argument they cannot win. And I invite ANYBODY on this forum to take up the debate with me.
>
>Prediction - All software that is developed today (2004) will be obselete in 10 years 2014).
>
>2014 - A small number of diehard .NET users, on the UT, are fighting the change to the more advanced .NOT that does NOT use the obselete MS-SQL, that is limited to a measly 999 tb of data storage. The same person (Bill Gaatts) that invented the .NOT system/concept had purchased the VFP language in 2007 and improved it to the point that it has become the most popular language of choice of the top Fortune 1000 companies.
>
>Programmers/Developers of the past, are no longer needed because the .NOT system integrates with the users brain. It will automatically calculate a solution to any problem the brain comes up with. In the event the users brain is not capable of generating the necessary problem, the .NOT system will access another persons brain that can. The current range of the system is 10 miles, but scientists are working to extend the range to 100 miles so that good problems are always available to solve.
>
>.NOT comes in Cherry, Strawberry, Orange and Grape flavors....more choices are in the works. The present cost is a dime a dozen, though as demand increases and production gets into full gear, the price will probably drop to the point where anybody can have at least one .NOT a day.
>
>The point - No one can predict 5 years down the road......let alone 10! I've been in Electronics/Computer fields since 1959 and, looking back, there is no way I could have predicted what things were going to be like 5 years into the future. I do remember when I was in my 30's and 40's that I was "full of myself" and a "know it all", and loved to argue....and win. Then, I grew up.