On Nov 12, 2012, at 8:16 AM, Alan Bourke <alanpbou...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> COBOL has been around since, what, 1960-something, and "In 1997, the
> Gartner Group reported that 80% of the world's business ran on COBOL
> with over 200 billion lines of code in existence and with an estimated 5
> billion lines of new code annually."
>
> So "old tech" does not necessarily equate to "bad idea".
If the question posed was whether to get rid of an existing VFP app
simply because it is "old tech", I would agree with this 100%. Unlike humans,
older tech tends to run faster and more reliably as time progresses.
However, if the question was what technology to use to develop a new
application, I think the answer for both COBOL and VFP should be the same:
absolutely not. There are many alternatives that can do the job as well or
better, and they will be much more supportable in the long run. There are
precious few new developers entering either of those languages these days, and
the only reason I can see for a consultant to recommend either is to line their
own pockets, as there is no way that such a choice for new development could
ever be in the best interest of the client.
Sorry if that sounds harsh, but that's the way that this industry
works. If you're not willing to learn new stuff, you really should find another
line of work.
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
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/52af40df-a40d-44d5-9451-3af409d8b...@rackspace.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.
