Kevin,
SNIP
>
>But, there's another part to this. There are periodic statements regarding .NET on this forum that demonstrate a lack of intellectual accountability. Sometimes they take the form of snide (and even silly) remarks like ".NOT, .HISTORY, .NOTYET, etc."...sometimes misinformed opinions presented as facts...and sometimes in the form of well-chosen manipulation of words intended to cast doubt on .NET's capabilities. The common theme is a personal bias against .NET. It is ironic that tactics used back in the mid'90's by Fox-haters against Fox are now being used by some Fox people against .NET.

When there's a snide or silly remark the context/author should be considered before letting it 'get' to you (or me, for that matter).
I haven't seen much "misinformed opinion presented as facts" in this forum, but I have seen lots of opinion shot at as misinformed and illegitimate because of lack of "actual .NET experience" and followed by the persistent ridiculing of the opinioner (new word) in later messages on the subject.
If I dare to say "the quality of .NET documentation by MS is terrible" and I base it on:
1) there still being columns in .NET 'magazines' like "Ask Dr. Docs"
2) many statement by many experienced .NET developers saying the quality of the documentation is lousy/inadequate/terrible.
...then have I misrepresented a fact because I don't have hands-on experience with .NET???

And surely you don't think that people who have negative things to say about are carefully crafting their wording to misinform and mislead!? People can and do have opinions about .NET but I'm sure they don't purposefully manipulate their words intending to mislead anybody. C'mon man.

>
>This is a technical forum, not a coffee shop, and people need to be held accountable for what they say. Doesn't mean someone needs to be slapped with an e-ruler or confronted with willful provocation for saying something incorrect. But when comments are made that are rooted in personal biases and/or lacking in any foundation, then a response is appropriate.

I think of the Chatter categry (where most of these things start) as more of a coffee shop than a technical area.
And how do you know that any comment is based on personal bias?.. or lacking any foundation?? Do you ask before your "appropriate response" is delivered?

>
>On the COBOL reference...just like there are COBOL apps out there today, I'm sure than 10 and even 20 years from now, there will still be Fox apps. But I go back to something that John Petersen and I said a few weeks ago - over time Fox will likely (at best) be maintained, .NET will likely be innovated.

There's a COBOL.NET, so I guess it's going to be around a while yet.
And while most of us may be quite sure that JohnP and you are right, some of us feel that it's not incontravertible nor that there's any rush. Some of us feel that .NET has yet to reach puberty and that there's still some market for VFP and that .NET's market may yet prove more limited than anticipated.
But I'm also pretty sure that virtually all of the "Foxheads" out here appreciate all of the crap that you early adopters of .NET have been through and continue to go through to pave the way for those of us who come along later.

cheers

>
>Kevin