Unfortunately, I do believe there is more then just cool by being in .Net. At least from a MS tools perspective, assuming someone's made a decision to stay a MS dev shop.

From my perspective there's also the tools market. MS has a very cool reporting tool that's free with SQL Server, reporting services. It's accessed thru a .net assembly. I haven't researched new activex controls, but I assume that while folks are maintaining exists controls, new development has substantially slowed.

So yes, to many the tool is insignificant. Until they ask the developer to add some functionality they saw in another app, that's developed using a tool not available because of the development language.

PF

>I went to an MS event about ASP 2.0. Very cool. At last security for XML. I was impressed. So a nice addition to the MS toolbox.
>
>In the meantime we still use VFP. Yes we still do and for the same reasons that we will or won't continue to use it.
>
>What it important is not the development language it's the application.
>
>It's pretty simple to understand. What do we do as an enterprise? Add features to our applications with a tool that is still doing a very good job. And by doing so keep on top of our market or do we allocate all the energies needed to redo an app we have right now with .Net
>
>Doing it in .Net would be cool. That's the problem right now it would only be that. COOL. No other benefits than that.
>
>So why risk losing our time for COOL. We don't have time for that. Competition is too fierce. And in the meantime .Net keeps getting better. From a data-centric point of view a lot of things should be ready in .Net 2005.
>
>So for us it's a win-win situation. Customers are happy with the products we have to offer. And we ABSOLUTELY have to do it in .Net we'll make the move.
>
>As for my argumentations, I will always argue with those that say things that don't fit with the way I see things. Nothing wrong with that. Is there?
>
>I know that marketing won't change for VFP but if some say that everything with it is perfect, because of their long-time friendship or whatever reasons tying them with somebody high in the MS establishment, I feel that other opinions should be heard.
>
>Have you noticed that all of those agreeing on the marketing being done on VFP are using .Net a lot. Hmm I wonder if there's a relation there <g>
>
>
>>My take on all this comes from a logical view of the world. There are ton's of examples of new products that cause total obsolesence of the previous version.
>>
>>In particular, we are in an industry that is moving 90 miles an hour. There have been many highly qualified people who jumped off the IT bandwagon when they could afford to, and moved on with their lifes. There is a story that is linked to from UT's front page about the percentage of women as programmers decreasing significantly over the last couple years. Us men are expected to constantly study to keep up in this field, even to the detriment of family life. While women are standing up and saying that they can not give up as much personal time as this field demands.
>>
>>We, as Foxpro developers, are specs on the landscape. You can already see that many folks are learning new technologies. Do you not see that many of the brighter, more advanced contributors are no longer present on the UT? What do you hope to accomplish by arguing with Ken Levy? It's been stated numerous times, VFP is marketed to existing VFP users. End of story! There is no attempt to increase marketshare. And never will be.