VFP is old tech -- it's true! It's MATURE! - there's not a lot of stuff you need that's not already in there.
It's STABLE! - unlike DotNet that is constantly churning "the right way to do things" VFP has established Best Practices. Your investment isn't going to get broken by a patch or a new version. There are RESOURCES - many, many developers have a FoxPro background. Resources can be found. There are DOZENs of excellent books (disclaimer: I wrote a couple pretty good ones). Whil Hentzen just released a new paper outlining the business case for upgrading FP 1/2.x to VFP, which I reviewed for him, which presents a lot of similar arguments. Check it out at http://www.hentzenwerke.com, available for a few dollars. He also posted these comments, FIVE YEARS AGO: http://hentzenwerke.com/oldl/f_ind.old?cidj=565&cat=blog for free. And on his site, which runs VFP. On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Kurt @ VR-FX <v...@optonline.net> wrote: > Well - that argument has Once Again Reared its UGLY head today for me. > Here I was, talking to a buddy of mine - and he knows these people that > needed a database system built for some kind of shipping container > tracking. My buddy had asked me a number of times over the past 6 months > about building a database system for these guys he knows. But, I was > working fultime - and, at the time - considering my Bot work I was doing on > the Side - I didn't really have time to take on a whole new project. > > But - now, obviously I HAVE a LOT of time I can dedicate to a knew > project. So - I told my buddy I would do that project now. Well, he spoke > to his associates last night - and that Whine that "VFP is Old Tech" and > that they don't want a system built with the stuff. Of course, I try to > tell my buddy that this is total BS - and he DOES side with me - but, not > sure if I we can convince his associates to let me go w/VFP. He even wants > me to see if I can meet up with the guy - and try and convince him > differently! My buddy suggested I show some kind of system I developed > w/VFP. And, I may be able to do exactly that. > > However, is there any other "Ammo" that I can use in my arguments to > convince the guy that its STILL a Viable Tech??? > > What say U all? > > TIA, > Kurt > An Old Out-of-Work VFP kinda guy... > > ______________________________**_________________ > Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com > Subscription Maintenance: > http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/**listinfo/profox<http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox> > OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/** > listinfo/profoxtech <http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech> > Searchable Archive: > http://leafe.com/archives/**search/profox<http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox> > This message: http://leafe.com/archives/**byMID/profox/509EA4C9.6040200@** > optonline.net<http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/509ea4c9.6040...@optonline.net> > ** 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. > > Report [OT] Abuse: http://leafe.com/reportAbuse/** > 509ea4c9.6040...@optonline.net<http://leafe.com/reportAbuse/509ea4c9.6040...@optonline.net> > -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cacw6n4srvfal0n3dxjvmtk5as6nxj8azgxbj-ysou8hojxi...@mail.gmail.com ** 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.
