It seems to me that the real competition isn't between VFP and VS, really.
It's between VFP and Access. Pushing VFP as a data provider for VS.NET apps
makes sense. VFP's ability to create COM objects that can encapsulate their
data access to VFP databases seems a sensible pitch, and it’s an important
distinction between VFP and Access.
So you can write C# front ends that use COM Interop, or you can use C# as a
front end to VFP tables directly via FoxPro's OLE provider.
The point is that FoxPro's GUI facilities cannot beat the flexibility and
power of the component development architecture of .NET (which MS robbed
from Borland, frankly), and should not try, except in those cases where
clients can't afford the whole shebang. It ought to focus on providing a
data solution for those "in-between" cases - where the extreme simple case
is using Access for a database to maintain Mom's X-mas recipes, and the
extreme complex case is supporting a multi-tier enterprise database in SQL
server (or Oracle, or PostgreSQL, etc).
FoxPro is the ideal database for small business solutions with less than 255
users. A C# front end using either COM interop to talk to VFP "business
objects" or using ADO via FoxPro's OLE DB provider makes sense as an
alternative to the extreme cases. I know there are MSDN articles on
precisely these topics, but it's not like the message goes beyond MSDN
subscribers. They don't *really* actively market these approaches.
For shops that cannot afford the whole .NET thing, FoxPro's GUI facilities
seem more than adequate. I just personally can't seem to get jazzed about
those GUI facilities, they seem so backward to me. Before .NET, I was a big
Delphi/C++ Builder guy (which is why .NET is like my native land - thank
you, Anders).
It's FoxPro's data architecture that keeps me sufficiently interested to
remain on this list (that and the many outrageous debates that occur in [OT]
posts, which I enjoy), but honestly it's damn hard to find anybody willing
to "risk" even a VFP back-end solution, given that MS pushes Access so hard
in those cases where SQL Server is overkill. Everybody wants to use Access
in these cases - this is FoxPro's problem. Not VS.NET.
Were I naïve, it might surprise me that MS doesn't do more to market VFP,
given its value position between Access and SQL Server. One concludes that
the only reason they haven't killed it is they don't want another anti-trust
violation lawsuit - they are just letting it die on the vine, no matter how
superior, technologically, it is to Access, in certain user scenarios.
Access, like the VB language that also never died the death it deserved, are
both inferior products kept alive only by Bill Gates' ego, fed by MS's
outstanding marketing machine. They both appeal to the "least common
denominator" programmer types who demand simplicity and are not only willing
but eager to sacrifice good design or creative solutions in the cause of
minimizing the amount of work they have to do.
In this sense it is the consumers who are to blame for the present state of
affairs. If our society had not become the "fast food", "what have you done
for me lately", instant-gratification culture it has, the majority would
demand - and the market would supply - better software. I have long
maintained that the reason software engineering has not matured into a true
engineering discipline is simply that not enough people die each year form
bad software. Anyway.
Getting back to MS. From the beginning, they wanted Access to kill FoxPro.
When they bought FoxPro, a better alternative appeared: Let FoxPro die a
slow death as the neglected step-child in the basement, and let Access
meanwhile take advantage of FoxPro's Rushmore technology. Have our cake and
eat it to, in other words.
A twisted variant of the old dictum "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em": "If
you can't eat 'em, make them join you - then let them starve."
Sincerely,
Bob Calco
| -----Original Message-----
| From: profox-bounces .at. leafe D.O.T com [mailto:profox-bounces@leafe.com] On Behalf
| Of Michael J. Babcock
| Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 7:21 AM
| To: profox .at. leafe D.O.T com
| Subject: Re: Fox technical chat on ProFox
|
| Brian Abbott wrote:
|
| > Repeat after me: 'I must not question Steve Ballmer's edict. Offering
| the
| > punter a choice only confuses them'.
| >
| > ;-)
| >
| > Michael J. Babcock wrote:
| >
| >>Ok, so don't go against Visual Studio directly, but at the very
| >>least, why not offer some sort of marketing for new VFP development
| >>work? You make it sound as though to push VFP would be bad on its
| >>own words against Visual Studio.
|
|
| ROLFMAO!! Good one, Brian!
|
| --
|
| Michael J. Babcock, MCP
| President/CSA, MB Software Solutions, LLC
| http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
| "Bettering your bottom line by helping you work smarter, not harder,
| with custom software solutions."
|
|
[excessive quoting removed by server]
©2004 Bob Calco |
|
