I think you're talking about yourself - I don't have any profit incentive from ActiveVFP and no, not even from consulting. Nobody said you or anybody else can't express your views and opinions. Criticisms should be expected in a forum like this and, like I've said before, it's unrealistic if you think anything and everything will go unchallenged, even from an authority like you...

>Claude,
>
>The only one who's 'drumming up' new business is around here is YOU! With your shameless plugging of your self and your wares (and services I presume) at every opportunity without fully balancing your views is doing everyone a disfavor...
>
>Your opinion is not fact, nor is mine, that's why we have forums like this so everybody can make their point.
>
>+++ Rick ---
>
>
>>I think the whole point of their posts is to drum up new business from vfpers en masse. The idea that they're trying to push is that vfp is not good at this or that. I've literally seen it in action right here. It included FUD like "VFP mtdlls aren't really multi-threaded" and "vfp is not designed to be used on the web". I would advise developers to be on the lookout for this type of rhetoric and take it with a grain of salt...
>>
>>>Just checked if foxisapi was included in vfp9 and, yes, it's still in there.
>>>
>>>Well thank you - I visited a thread [here] yesterday where the poster suggested foxISAP was not packaged with VFP 9. Thank you for setting the record straight.
>>>
>>>When I visit other fox sites (usually after a google related to a current project) I am heartened by the dedication and excitement. They view non VFP applications as tools to extend VFP with, not a replacemnt.
>>>
>>>Rarely will a VFP appologist suggest the ingnorance of the participants for continuing to work with VFP.
>>>
>>>Only here, on the UT, would someone [or some group] seem so vain and self interested [as] to suggest the topic of this thread. If - and I say if - state side NET projects are in such demand - how can these .NET shops afford the time to put together an event like the one suggested by this thread? Shouldn't they be out there trying to figure how to allocate their time to service the high demand / low supply of a .NET market in crisis!
>>>
>>>These were the same guys pressing us to move to VB and n-tier just a few months back.
>>>
>>>Your first response to this thread said it all: "Why convert?" Just Learn NET [from scratch] - or [do what many of us do] learn what you need, as you go, when required by a project.
>>>
>>>NET is not rocket science - NET is not salvation or redemtion - it's just a program - a repack of a legacy scripting engine. Is it really brand new: ASP vs ASP NET / VB - vs VB NET / ADO vs ADO NET. The honest thing would have been to [simply] call it VB 9!:-)
>>>
>>>Give me a NET application object that I can instanciate from VFP - and if and when I need to use it - answer my questions and don't re-direct me to some conversion service game!
>>>
>>>>Just checked if foxisapi was included in vfp9 and, yes, it's still in there. Probably not updated since vfp6, though. If you're looking for them to improve it, it's not going to happen. Not only are they not interested in stressing web capabilities in vfp, but, this technology is old. VFP mtdlls are the very best developers can do with vfp web apps. Servicing web requests with 3 or 4 vfp EXEs is a crude simulation of multi-threading, whether foxisapi or most of the other 3rd party tools. The disconnect happened after mtdll technology was introduced for vfp web services. All of a sudden there was no more emphasis from MS on vfp and the web. More than likely this has something to do with the push to .NET...
>>>>>
>>>>>Where is VFP 9 foxISAPI? Why did Whil get a call about wine? I am sure the "experts" were freaking out and did their fair share of "wining" before the lawyers made the call.
>>>>>