I see, Bill. Thanks for providing the info. I don't have a problem keeping up with anything that enhances VFP, but I don't see any use for LINQ or the VFP Toolkit for DotNet. If Sedna provides tools that give VFP abilities it can't do today, that would be good, but if it turns out to be just bait to get us to switch to .NET, I'll have no interest.
Have a good weekend too. If all goes as planned, I'll be relocated to Long Island this weekend. Not happy to leave this beautiful area, but I gotta fish in deeper waters. Bill > Bill Arnold said, in one of his posts yesterday - > " Fitting the best of VFP into another product might be a > great idea in and of itself, and I'm surprised MS didn't do > it with .NET, " > > Ya - I'm quoting a bit out of context - but - > > 1. LINQ was designed with a lot of the VFP functionality, > and [hopefully] may be rolled out RSN. > > 2. Sedna is an interop piece to bridge between VFP and that > dot something architecture. > > 3. http://fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~VFPToolkitForDotNet~DotNet > > I would posit back to ya, Mr. A - > I know its hard to keep up with everything - but after > reviewing these things, I would suggest to you [strongly] > that MS is doing SOME of 'that' in the first place with these > later rollouts of the dot something toolsets. > > I'm a die-hard VFP person, and I didn't learn dot something > to actually write with it, I learned it so I could rescue > failing dot something projects back to other toolsets (VFP, W/LAMP) . > > I swear that this one tidbit, yes albeit taken out of > context, makes me understand a bit better about how hard it > is to keep up with current stuff. > > Hang in there, Mr. A - I'm still not convinced that the dot > something architecture makes sense from any thing that is > measurable - you know, you remember - a wonderful example - > them old function points from yer IBM days, and the concept > of function point computational analysis? Comparing dot > something to VFP , solely on a function point basis, keeps > VFP the clear winner of which toolset to use to deliver apps > in a timely fashion. > > I could go on, right? and talk about data access techniques, > server throughput, roundtrips back to the server, why xml > translation is so important with accessing DATA in the dot > something architecture, blah blah etc etc ad.nasuem. But I > won't - these performance issues are covered elsewhere. I > won't even bring up the facts about cost of servers and cost > of licensing to commercially deploy a dot something-written > application - it's been done before. > > Have a good weekend!!! > > Regards [Bill] > -- > William Sanders / efGroup {rmv the DOT BOB to reply} > VFP Webhosting? You BET! -> http://efgroup.net/vfpwebhosting > Failing dotNet Project? -> http://www.dotnetconversions.com > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
