Hi Denis,

><snip>
>
>I'm surprised by that statement. Usually the salary offered could be higher because there are not as many developers working with a tool than there used to be

That's what I would have thought, and what 'market-forces' economics would suggest, but IMO that is not the experience. I get the impression that because many good VFP developers have 'jumped-ship' and moved over to VB, .NET, SQL-server, etc., software houses have also chosen to go that way rather than pay more for a diminishing pool of VFP developers. It's a chicken-and-egg situation. If the employers had more faith in VFP, the number of developers would increase, thus encouraging other companies to adopt VFP, because there would be a pool of good developers, which means more competition for jobs, and the employers could pay less!

Who's going to make the first move and take the risk? There's no chance of MSFT advertising how good VFP is (except to existing users, of course), so it's up to us to spread the word, and what chance does a 'one-man-band' VFP contractor/developer have trying to persuade a company's IT department that VFP is still the best and most cost-effective tool for the job for many small/medium-sized companies?

SET MOAN OFF

Regards,
Alan