Hi John....

I reply with great respect to your expertise and abilities. On some points I agree, with some I don't.

>
>There is probably more marketing and support from MS now than there has ever been - at least since the xBase standards comittee disbanded.If you are a VFP developer who wants to go on building monolithic apps - you don't have much to complain about. However, if you are a VFP developer who wants to jump on the Visual Studio bandwagon - you have an entry point. And, with Tahoe, more improvements were made where it counts..... in the middle tier area.
>

I don't disagree with this, technically, *but* will MS ever expose White Papers to the general developer community entailing an app with VFP middleware? I'm not holding my breath.

>Will MS ever recommend VB developers use VFP? No.
>Will MS ever force VFP developers to switch to VB? No.
>Will VFP ever over-take VB in terms of number of boxes sold? No.
>Is VFP MS's strategic enterprise wide C/S development tool? No.
>
>Can you create C/S enterprise apps with VFP? Yes.
>Can you build middle tier objects with VFP? Yes.
>Can you build stand-alone apps with VFP? Yes.
>

Again: I am in total agreement.

>Do you really need MS to continually get on a soapbox to proudly proclaim that you can build awesome stand alone/File Server based applications with MS??? These are not the types of apps that you will see in Microsoft Promotions. Its a client/server - DNA world. And, VB is MS's strategic tool for this. However, we VFP developer's have not been left out in the cold as we have the ability to create middle tier objects that can participate in Windows DNA.
>


Yes, yes, and yes. But, doggone it (harsher words are in mind but I respect Michels rules :)), how am I to justify VFP middleware to a client (or MIS manager) if I do not have a single definitive reference from Microsoft?? Or single ad detailing that function.

>With all of these improvements, should you rely on 1 tool? No.
>

I really, truly don't.

>VB developer's are encouraged to use other tools - most noteably Visual Interdev. The same is true for VFP developers. Fact is, no matter what you primarily develop in - you should have other tools in your aresenal.
>

True, true.

>Where does VFP win..... At data handling an manipulation? No doubt that VFP COM Objects do a much better job of this than the same components in VB. At the very least, they are much easier to develop. You may ask, why do VB developer's still develop that stuff in VB??? Because it is all they know. I have yet to find a hard-core VB developer who decided to use VFP soley for middle tier work because of VFP's Data Manipulation Language.
>

I have yet to run into a hardcore VB developer who understood squat about VFP at all. Look at my threads on the DEVX.COM newsgroups.

>I am working on data processing utilities that do processing on a server with VFP COM Objects. The front-end is one of three: VFP, VB, IE. Why did I choose VFP is as the middle tier? Because it was the right tool for the job, AND... I know the language. If all I knew was VB, then I guess it would have been done in VB - and because I did not know any better, I would have been satisfied with the result. Bottom line is I know the difference and I can develop kick-ass apps - REGARDLESS OF THE LEVEL OF MARKETING FROM MICROSOFT.
>

You know that, I know that. But without documented support from MS, how do we sell it to clients??? This is a *very* real concern, John. If you're an IT worker in a large shop, your manager is going to want case studies or articles before he approves it; likewise a client will want some proof-of-concept and blessing from MS.

>I know Robert Green and I can tell you that he just got back from several weeks of being on the road pumping up VFP. Trust me, the effort is there...
>

I have the utmost respect for Robert Green.

>Its like people bitching because of the lack of VFP sessions at TechEd. How many VFP developers go to TechEd. Not many. The sessions I gave in Nice, France last year had a combined total attendance of 50 people. Microsoft spent a lot of money for me to go over there to talk to 50 people. I will be interested to see how many people go to my session in New Orleans this June. Unless you make the comittment to go to TechEd - you don't have the right to bitch. What sense does it make for MS to spend money putting on sessions when the attendance will be almost nil. From a business standpoint - it makes zero sense.
>

John, buddy, I *always* have the right to bitch :) Email me details on your TechEd session in New Orleans in June and, my bosses willing, I will be there. With bells on.

>So... where are we. VFP is alive and well. There will be a 6.0 version. There will be a version after that. We can develop great apps. VFP works with the other apps. Tahoe will work better with the other apps. Most importantly, I can do things in VFP today that were impossible to do a few years ago. That is improvement. Are there things I would like to see that are not in the product. Yes!! I am never satisfied and am greedy for more features that I could ever hope to see in the product. For those features that are available elsewhere - like VB - I will use VB and integrate it with VFP. DONT WAIT FOR MS TO PUT THINGS IN VFP THAT ARE ALREADY IN OTHER TOOLS. STATE USING THE OTHER TOOLS TODAY!!!
>

I do use other tools....InterDev, some VB.

I hope that my counterpost has cleared up any misunderstanding. I think I know where you're coming from but you have to try to understand the position of those, like me, who are no longer total independants and have to be able to point to strategic documents or ads to support a topology.

Take care,

John