>From the "VFP6/Win7 and GetDir" thread: >> Is anyone aware of any gotchas please.
>I'd have to say the main one is that VFP6 isn't supported anymore. VFP6 or VFP9, this smacks of a precedent that shouldn't pass unnoticed: MS can't be allowed to make changes that break tested, production VFP applications. We (I, anyway) can accept the VFP9 is all we're going to get from MS. Color this simplistic if you want, but when I look at what VFP9 can do on a Windows machine, alongside some web dev tools, and then factor in VFPx http://www.codeplex.com/VFPX not to mention what we're built in our own classlibs, our workbenches are loaded for bear with more then enough goodies to keep us gainfully occupied for years and years to come. The way I see it, this whole computer trip has been an Alice in Wonderland experience from day 1, and it would be good to keep it this way. But events like this, if they slip unnoticed, can be a harbinger of a cloud on VFP's horizon: the prospect that MS would make a change that would break running VFP9 applications. There's a world of difference between discontinuing the VFP product line - and even stopping support for the product - and changing something that breaks VFP products in the field. These are two VERY different sides of the VFP story. If MS says the solution to this problem is to upgrade to VFP9, personally I'd give them the benefit of the doubt (mostly because VFP9 is that much better, so the upgrade is warranted in it's own right), but we should have all shields up when it comes to any change MS makes in Windows that hurts a VFP9 application. MS drew a line with VFP9 themselves when they declared "this is it". Some people left and some stayed. Frankly, the prospect of VFP9 remaining stable for some time to come is highly appealing to me, but many developers are more interested in following the money or have bought lock, stock and barrel into the "out with the old, in with the new" mentality foisted on the software world by MS, so they ran off with the first big wind that blew through town (aka .NET). I submit that the people who have stayed with VFP made the best choice, having developed sophisticated (and expensive) systems using VFP over time and who are not only happy with the results to date, but have do-lists a mile long, all doable with the tools we already have. In a large sense MS itself has written our mandate: that by accepting VFP9 as the last of the series, and the hit we've taken in the marketplace due to their decision, we can't now allow MS to change Windows in such a way as to break our VFP9 applications, and force us to throw away all the work we've done so far. We bought into a major re-write from FP to VFP, but now we're into the OOP world, and there doesn't exist a major new concept that invalidates OOP and VFP. Not to mention that the time and cost of having to do would put some or most of us out of business. While this particular example involves VFP6 and may not be alone or even a disaster story, it does smack of the one remaining way that MS can hurt us. It's beyond doubt now that MS has decided it's finished with us. I color that has a bad decision following a long history of untruths and backstabbing, but we've lived with it. What we can't live with is MS breaking our VFP9 products by changing Windows. The limbo state this puts us into wouldn't go on forever, and we're not looking at the next 100 years anyway. All we really need is enough time for someone to take the lead and show us how to carry existing work forward with minimum disruption using either a new runtime or a new language. History is full of examples where great people rise to great challenges, and we've got some very capable people right here. Bill http://wjarnold.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ 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 Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/47e6c9a1f1ec403fa9ecdacaec03d...@bills ** 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.
