Jay,

>Where do I want to start?

>You're the one consistently stating as fact that .NET isn't ready for serious development and that one shouldn't move to it from Fox.

Where did I state this as fact? I never wanted to imply .NET is not ready for serious development, though I do believe it is not mature yet (compared to what the platform is going to be in about a few years) for complex database applications. (and don't confuse large (enteprise) database applications with complex database applications. that is a mistake). I've never dismissed the validness of the .NET platform. Just read my messages again and see what it is saying.

However, I do state facts regarding the database handling side of it and my opinion why these facts do matter. For example. ADO.NET recordssets don't scale. This is not an opinion, but a fact. If you don't have any use for scalable local data, then this fact is not of any value to you whether you use .NET or VFP. If you do, then it indeed is a measure.

Most of my discussions are about the importance of a fact. There are more of these facts and they might make a difference.

My problem with .NET from a VFP perspective is that on certain areas it is taking a step back. And in order to do things that could be done in VFP so easily, you'll have to workaround the problem (Tip: Search for workaround in your dictory). Handling data is an important one. You lose quite some options of design strategies and ease of databinding. The reports from microsoft say that the .NET team currently is looking at features found in VFP to implement in .NET improving future .NET versions. And I don't even talk about the new technologies like AVALON that is going to introduce a whole new GUI to .NET. and blurr the border between internet apps and winform apps.

If you accept the above as a fact, is it then so odd that from a VFP perspective .NET is not mature yet? (And don't forget that inmature might mean 'innovative' and 'maintenance mode' might mean 'mature'), so in a way by saying inmature, I'm not dismissing .NET at all, except that I expect much more from it in the future and I'm waiting for that.

>Yes, that's simplified, but I think accurate. I've seen enough messages from a number of people who actually use .NET for real world development that it seems a solid choice for the next 15 years or so. And I just saw a post that said that Norton was using the .NET framework in some of its modules. I just saw over 5,000 jobs listed on Monster and only 175 listed for Foxpro. Doesn't that tell you something, Walter?

Again, You seem to think I dismiss the validness of the .NET framework. This is not at all the case. About the job postings: This is not surprising at all. First of all the application of .NET is much and much wider than VFP. It runs on more platforms, it is not one language, but a framework on which you can use many different languages. It is a big improvement over VS6 taking about the whole VB market with it.

However...., I firmly resist to the picture that .NET totally overlaps VFPs market. There are arguments to find where VFP is better suited for the job than .NET. In VFP we make database apps. In .NET beeing a general purpose platform we can program about everything. If you draw a line from .NET to ERP/ERM, you'll find VFP in between, beeing a language that is more geared towards solving business solutions (** warning ** this is my OPINION), as it is a more data-centric language (fact).


A final word about where my (in your eye unfounded) opinions come from. My arguments are concentrated on the data hanlding apsects of .NET comparing it with VFP. I've got a history of 12 years in FP2.x/VFP, graduated on the subject of relational databases. I've worked extensively with both VFP and SQL - Server. I've solved many difficult queries about data. I've lead quite a few database conversions from one structure to another. In fact I'm obsessed with data related problems. And I'll use databases as much as possible in solving problems. Whether it is calculation of prime numbers, determine which numbercombinations add up to a given amount, the challenge Calvin Hsia attended to in listing all words/word - number combinations can be made out of a single phonenumber, Documenting application structure, etc. It does not matter: I'll use the local data engine to solve the problem. You'll have a hard time finding someone who has both a very large practical record and theoretical record regarding databases and their use. So in this respect I could honestly say I've got lots of experience and theorectical knowledge of working with databases.

Now, take my comments on .NET which mainly are arround ADO.NET. Having studied ADO.NET, knowing its strengths (yes I might be able to name one or two), and weaknesses (a much longer list). Wouldn't you think I would not be able to make an informed statement about that ??

Think about it..

>I know Foxpro and enjoy developing in it, but you have not said one thing that would convince me not to add it to my toolbox. If you care enough, do a comparison and tell me why someone should not do the same. If you don't, then let's just end it here.

I would not discourage anyone to add it to their toolbox. However I'd like to warn people here that .NET is not a VFP replacement. Technically they are very different animals and for each given problem they have pro's and cons. Just be aware of that. You'd better validate yourself by looking at the applications you've got and are going to write and which market you're going to participate in. Look at the technical aspects and draw your conclusion from there.

My participation in these thread is ment to start a discussion about pros and cons rather than blindly accepting what a few loud .NET guys have to say. You might find my arguments irrelevant as you have different thoughts practises or requirements than I do. Fine then you made your decision. However, there are also people who do use certain VFP strenghts extensively and might find some sense in the arguments and start thinking about it. In this light it is not about right or wrong, but rather what suits your best.

Walter,