Now you see John, you could have written your entire post as simply, 1+4+64+128+512 or 709, for speed.


>Dale,
>
>Too often, people come up here, looking for arguments to justify the use of Fox. These people are confronted at work, either by managers or external consultants. These people come up here, looking for ammunition to fight back with.
>
>The fact is Dale, whether you want to believe this or not, for new development, Fox - although it may have been the best choice before - is often not the best choice today. That said, if we are talking about small mom/pop apps, then sure - Fox is a great choice. But given how easy it is to build web-based apps today, and given how pervasive the Internet is today - building a web-based app is not a big deal.
>
>I advocate open architectures so that firms - no matter how big or small - are not tied to a single developer. In most of the Fox systems I have seen, the firms have been tied to single developer. And when that developer is not available, those systems are almost impossible to support. And as a result, those systems cost a lot of money to support. Also, as a business changes, these old fox systems are often - very difficult to extend.
>
>I have worked on some of the biggest Fox apps in existence today. And...I have worked on very small Fox apps as well. I have extensive knowledge and experience in the client server arena - using both SQL Server and Oracle. And, I have experience in the .NET arena as well. I have first hand knowledge of many aspects of this market - and with the issues many end-users have had to contend with. In short - I know of what I speak of here.
>
>Again, whether you believe me or dis-believe me, I don't care. To say that we are a bunch of .NET'ers who are doing nothing but poo-poo'ing Fox in favor of .NET is totally absurd. You say I am a jerk - but in the end, we simply disagree with one another. I call it as I see it. Factually, there is little you can disagree with - which frustrates you - and leads you to take personal shots. That's fine... All that serves to do is lessen any credibility you may have had.
>
>I do have VFP developer's best interest at heart. FWIW, in the past 6 months, I have been responsible for 2 developers getting work. Tell me Dale, how many Fox developer's have you faciliated getting employed? I have donated a lot of my time, by way of whitepapers, peer to peer support, etc. Of particular interest to me - are those Fox developers who cannot find work in Fox anymore. Those are the people I have tried to help the most. At least I tell these people the straight story. I don't sugar coat it for them.
>
>When the day comes that your contributions to the Fox world equal mine - then you can begin to criticize. As of this date, I don't see a single article, whitepaper, book, or conference session from you. And during my trips to MS - to go over strategies on how to help make Fox a first class product - I don't recall seeing you sitting at the table. In this regard, you are exactly like Bill Sanders. Quick to criticize - but in the end - never offered or delivered much value.
>
>You think you know about my committent - either past or present to the product or those who use the product??? Dale, you don't have a clue.
>
>And with that said, I'll continue - as long as I have time - to provide commentary for those who continually come up here - asking for advice on how to sell Fox. I'll continue to provide input and insight as to why their thniking may not be as clear as it should and why they may be fighting a losing battle. And in addition, why gaining a new skill set may be in their best interests.
>
>You should probably worry more about your state of affairs - the worrying about what I say...
>
>John
>