Kevin,

>2) In the last year, five forum members with .NET experience have corrected .NET statements/assertions from one member. The fundamental issue was not that the one member didn't have practical experience with .NET - the main issue was that the assertions were either incorrect or very misleading. Again, as this is a technical forum, the assertions were called into question and often refuted.

Hold a minute here Kevin. If you're talking about me then please have the prove here. I Have not proven wrong here. The only situation where I was not sure, was the part of visual inheritance not beeing possible in some cases. And if you slap me with this one, please note that I stated at forehand that I did not quite know the details about that. Later it turned out to be that only a subset of classes (like a textbox, commandbutton etc) were not visually subclassible.

About missleading. The pot calls the kettle black. This is the part I'm the .NET guys accusing of: THEIR TOTAL LACK OF ABILITY TO SEE THE DIFFIRENCE BETWEEN A DATA CENTRIC LANGUAGE LIKE VFP AND A GENERAL PURPOSE DEVELOP PLATFORM LIKE .NET.

.NET guys saying there are no differences and there are no disadvantages are the one that are misleading. Guys who take very simple applications and succesfully move them to .NET and taking that as a measure that every VFP application can be succesfully moved to .NET is misleading.

Like it or not, but with a healthy view and a bit of knowledge you're far more able to draw founded opinions then joe 'practical' average doing their thing in both. And when I explain my standpoints on this why from an architectual point the current .NET implementation is a miss and why database technology should play a bigger role in software architecture on the whole and why total data driven applications are the way to to go, it stays awfully silent at the .NET side (appart from dismissing it as 'absurd'). Maybe they realise that VFP is more geared toward that direction than .NET.

Yes I do have a firm background in computer science theory. I do have a degree in CS. My main course was software developement and graduated on Relational Database theory (CODD and DATE) and its history, SQL and ISAM (VFP) implementations. I did work an a wide variaty of projects from Machine code to ERM/ERP software implementations. From Health Care to greenhouses for flours, from government to the garage on the corner.

And as I said before. It is not that I don't like .NET and do not recognize its place. And I agree that it is a giant leap forward compared to VS6, but the assertion that it totally overlaps VFPs marketplace is just plain misleading. Sure many projects that have been done in VFP can be done in .NET without much difficulty (though I'm not convinced it can be done in the same amount of time, because of data binding, ADO.NET issues, and the fact that .NET is a more 'low level' language than VFP (it takes more code in .NET to do the same thing as in VFP).

walter