You said "whiners." I said child.

You must be kidding though. Do you really beleive that all the noise is going to make a difference? Do you think that other than a small pocket of people in the Foxpro team and perhaps in an obscure room in the accounts receivable department, that things won't naturally progress along the trend line that they have been for 8 years? I understand that you personally have an investment that you want to protect - and that might explain some of your excitability on this, but the natural thing is for Foxpro as we know it today to cease to exist at some point in the future. If you can't see that, then you are truly at a disadvantage. I feel like I'm talking with a religous zealot. Those battle are never won, only prolonged, so I'm done talking with you about this.

>Well, that's not exactly what you said which was: we're "spoiled whiners" because we don't accept that it's natural for these languages to just die out. If the language has any installed base and acceptance, it's not a natural progression that it just die out(or be killed by Microsoft, even though that's possible). It is natural for it to be improved on and morph into an even more useful tool like c, vb, cobol.net, etc.,etc. have. If you had argued that putting VFP features in .NET would be a sort of natural progression, or even the creation of a vfp.net, or especially better vfp/.net interop/docs would be a natural progression, then I could have gone along with your reasoning...
>
>>Claude, you're crying wolf. If I wanted, I could maintain my Foxpro clients easily for 10 years more. The smart thing for me to do - and for my clients - is to recognize what you obviously do not, and plan for the future. That is a natural progression.
>>
>>>It's not taking into consideration the installed base and knowledge of users (VB6/VFP) - MS is expecting many of them to scrap applications and redo some things from scratch. Can you do that with your clients??
>>>>How is that not natural?
>>>>
>>>>>Probably the most important aspect is acceptance by developers and existing code base of which undoubtedly C and Basic have more of than VFP. However, I think VFP is still strong in both regards(partially thanks to MS!). My argument would be that MS is trying to force the issue and it's not a natural progression at all as far as the current state of VB6 and VFP and MS's push to get everyone on the .NET bandwagon..