RE: M$ giving more support to dbf?

: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Man-wai Chang Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 4:48 AM To: ProFox Email List Subject: Re: M$ giving more support to dbf? On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:01 PM, <mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com> wrote: > On 2016-09-16 08:31, Man-

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:01 PM, wrote: > On 2016-09-16 08:31, Man-wai Chang wrote: > > Actually I'd wager the US Govt--if anything--had a hand in keeping it from > behind totally taken off the table LONG ago. You may recall that several > speculated

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Nah, I'll take FreeDOS, thanks. https://opensource.com/life/16/9/interview-jim-hall-freedos On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Alan Bourke wrote: > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, at 03:01 PM, > mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote: > >> (DR-DOS anyone?) > > What,

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, at 03:01 PM, mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote: > (DR-DOS anyone?) What, DR-DOS where the pre-release version of Windows 3.1 wouldn't run on it (or any other non MS-DOS) but the check was disabled in the release version of Windows 3.1 ? -- Alan Bourke

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On 2016-09-16 08:31, Man-wai Chang wrote: You talking about wars and peace-time conflicts? They never end. :) Keeping VFP alive without adding new features is a simple task. But Micro$oft and possibly US Government chose the Dark Side. Actually I'd wager the US Govt--if anything--had a hand

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Wrong!! Did you lose your old combat skill? :) On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Dave Crozier wrote: > Old habits die hard Mike! > > Dave -- .~. Might, Courage, Vision. SINCERITY! / v \ 64-bit Ubuntu 9.10 (Linux kernel 2.6.39.3) /( _ )\

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

You talking about wars and peace-time conflicts? They never end. :) Keeping VFP alive without adding new features is a simple task. But Micro$oft and possibly US Government chose the Dark Side. On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 6:09 AM, wrote: > > Sometimes I

RE: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Old habits die hard Mike! Dave -Original Message- From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com Sent: 15 September 2016 23:10 To: ProFox Email List <profox@leafe.com> Subject: Re: M$ giving more support to dbf? On 2016-09

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On 2016-09-14 07:47, Man-wai Chang wrote: The simplest solution is still resurrecting Visual Foxpro. Micro$oft has its source codes. Market shares of VFP has nothing to do with maintaining an old but popular tool. Of course, abandoning VFP could force everyone to buy new developments from

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Stephen Russell wrote: > This is business not family. Having developers expand their capabilities > and leverage the web in the 2000s was the desire. .NET was the vehicle by > m$ vs java and php. > Today it is all javascript, html5 and

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Bingo. When your truck has 250,000 miles on it you consider getting a replacement and enjoying the new features instead of yanking the engine and rebuilding it before it has an internal problem. VFP did it's thing and it was a purchased entity not grown in house by M$. This is business not

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

> I think the death of VFP was not just a normal product > cycle but a political if not military tool for affect other countries. > Micro$oft and US Government clearly knew the consequences. :) I really think that's tinfoil hat territory. It didn't fit in with the .NET world and SQL Server and

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

The simplest solution is still resurrecting Visual Foxpro. Micro$oft has its source codes. Market shares of VFP has nothing to do with maintaining an old but popular tool. Of course, abandoning VFP could force everyone to buy new developments from Micro$oft and hire new programmers. Sometimes, I

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On 2016-09-13 09:49, Ted Roche wrote: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Stephen Russell wrote: I don't think that the core of the OS is today what was around when they were making VFP. Nonsense. No matter how much lipstick they slap on the pig, this is still Windows

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Sep 13, 2016, at 12:36 AM, Thierry Nivelet wrote: > Work and creativity usually do more than miracles... +1000 The common response in the open source world when someone complains that their project doesn’t do Feature Foo, is “patches welcome!”. That’s a snarky way

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Stephen Russell wrote: > > I don't think that the core of the OS is today what was around when they > were making VFP. Nonsense. No matter how much lipstick they slap on the pig, this is still Windows NT at its core. > There is a 2 gig

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Man-wai Chang wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Ed Leafe wrote: > >> > >> When I said "resurrecting Visual Foxpro", I was referring the one and > >> only Visual Foxpro owned by Micro$oft. :) > > > > The final step in

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016, at 03:40 PM, Ted Roche wrote: > > So, perhaps a console ("command line") interface for quick-and-easy > scripting, an ability to use a variety of desktop widget packages, > like wxWidgets, GTK, etc., the ability to plug into popular web > servers like Apache and nginx, and

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Work and creativity usually do more than miracles... Chen has released a 64-bit VFP compiler (http://www.baiyujia.com/vfpcompiler/), and many other 3rd party softwares dramatically extend VFP's scope compared to what it was 10 years ago. Thierry Nivelet http://foxincloud.com/ Give your VFP

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Ed Leafe wrote: >> >> When I said "resurrecting Visual Foxpro", I was referring the one and >> only Visual Foxpro owned by Micro$oft. :) > > The final step in grieving over death is to accept it and move on. > Resurrection is the stuff of myths,

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Sep 12, 2016, at 6:40 AM, Man-wai Chang wrote: >> Well, Paul McNett and I *tried* to do that when we created Dabo, which does >> pretty much everything that VFP does, but with an open license and a future >> path forward. It did require learning Python instead of Xbase,

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Alan Bourke wrote: > On Mon, 12 Sep 2016, at 02:26 PM, Stephen Russell wrote: >> Why would you want to be limited to another desktop form based UI is my >> only question. > > That's the thing. If you were starting 'Visual FoxPro' today you

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016, at 02:26 PM, Stephen Russell wrote: > Why would you want to be limited to another desktop form based UI is my > only question. That's the thing. If you were starting 'Visual FoxPro' today you would have to end up something designed to operate with various types of

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Why would you want to be limited to another desktop form based UI is my only question. On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Alan Bourke wrote: > > BTW, have your team ever considered to write a conversion tool that > > translates *ALL* VFP codes into Python, including its

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

> BTW, have your team ever considered to write a conversion tool that > translates *ALL* VFP codes into Python, including its Report Writer? > Kind of a big ask. -- Alan Bourke alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm ___ Post Messages to:

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Edward Leafe wrote: > Well, Paul McNett and I *tried* to do that when we created Dabo, which does > pretty much everything that VFP does, but with an open license and a future > path forward. It did require learning Python instead of Xbase, but

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, at 02:12 AM, Laurie Alvey wrote: > haven't looked at Dabo, but doesn't Python mean web based apps? Can it do > desktop? > > Laurie Yes, Python, like Ruby, is fairly synonymous with web applications. However that was one of the goals of Dabo - to create a desktop application

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Ted, That is interesting. I can see where Dabo would be able to replace VFP. For many years I have used some DBI ocx controls for scheduling, and a few other functions. I like the way that DBI works and I was not able to make VFP code that would do the same things as nicely as DBI does it. Is

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 9:12 PM, Laurie Alvey wrote: > haven't looked at Dabo, but doesn't Python mean web based apps? Can it do > desktop? > Take two minutes to skim http://www.dabodev.com/ ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

There's a python desktop package for windows.Mike Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S7 edge. Original message From: Laurie Alvey <trukke...@gmail.com> Date: 9/10/16 8:12 PM (GMT-06:00) To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: Re: M$ giving more support to dbf? haven't

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

to:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Ken > McGinnis > Sent: Sunday, 11 September 2016 6:08 AM > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: Re: M$ giving more support to dbf? > > True, but change is painful or at least it seems like it would be painful. > > I, like some others on thi

RE: M$ giving more support to dbf?

V1.02 was first for me. Been with it ever since. -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Ken McGinnis Sent: Sunday, 11 September 2016 6:08 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: Re: M$ giving more support to dbf? True, but change is painful

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

True, but change is painful or at least it seems like it would be painful. I, like some others on this list started with Fox back in the 1980's and like some others on this list, I hope god will deliver a miracle and save us. I haven't prayed yet. Maybe that would help? Note that VFP9 SP2

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

On Sep 10, 2016, at 6:39 AM, Man-wai Chang wrote: > Resurrect Visual Foxpro, please! Make it 64-bit at least! :) Well, Paul McNett and I *tried* to do that when we created Dabo, which does pretty much everything that VFP does, but with an open license and a future path

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

Resurrect Visual Foxpro, please! Make it 64-bit at least! :) On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Stephen Russell wrote: > Drivers for Access to use should help you with your foxpro files I am > guessing. -- .~. Might, Courage, Vision. SINCERITY! / v \ 64-bit Ubuntu 9.10

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

You can already do that in Excel through the VFP OLE DB driver. -- Alan Bourke alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm On Thu, 8 Sep 2016, at 05:19 PM, Stephen Russell wrote: > I thought it gave you the hooks to work from Excel to pull in dbf data. > Or > to call the standard dbo engine from

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

I thought it gave you the hooks to work from Excel to pull in dbf data. Or to call the standard dbo engine from any app and consume other M$ data. It was never intended as a VFP replacement, just an opener to data that is in dbf format. On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Alan Bourke

Re: M$ giving more support to dbf?

dBase IV format. Useful for people without VFP to open them, and for Access users to connect and pull in data. -- Alan Bourke alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance:

M$ giving more support to dbf?

Drivers for Access to use should help you with your foxpro files I am guessing. http://www.winbeta.org/news/dbase-file-support-comes-back-microsoft-access -- Stephen Russell Sr. Analyst Ring Container Technology Oakland TN 901.246-0159 cell --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---