>Hi All,
>
>Well, I just finished reading the article on VFP 6 in this month's FoxPro Advisor. Perhaps the article focussed mainly on things of interest to the author, I don't know, but if that's all there is, I certainly feel very down indeed.
>
>It seems that *most* of the work went into making the Project Manager fully "objectified" so that it too can be fully manipulated programmatically. That's a real niceity for a few, but I've NEVER had a user aske me to do something with the Project Manager!!!
>
>And I understand that ARRAYS can now be passed between VFP servers and clients. And I understand that there are a few new baubles to play with which might have some use.
>
>But, overall, we seem to have a release which was conceived and designed WITHOUT USER INPUT. Possibly some of the VFP product vendors had some input (not many else would ask for an objected Project Manager, I'll bet) but what about REAL USERS who design for REAL USERS????
>
>*IF* DEVCON confirms these impressions, then I think it is time to try to do something about it - to find a way to get USER "wish lists" and other USER suggestions addressed. Clearly the present mechanism is not working - the one where we state what we'd like through various lists and means and then wait and hope to see them happen.
>
>While a little more patience is called for yet, I put this out now in hopes that, if DEVCON seems to be going this way, someone will say something to the powers that be to get this ball rolling.
>
>Not so cheerily,
>
>Jim N

You know how I like to stir things up, but I like what I've read as reviews in PC Week and InfoWorld (links found here in UT). I am encouraged to see a review say that it could contend with Delphi and PowerBuilder (the reviewer did not mention VB which falls in this group, of course). Also, the reviews indicated that it could provide very good COM objects for data intensive projects, which even non-FoxPro programmers may want to consider.

I hope to see a BETA in my next MSDN update...

Jack Mendenhall
Reinsurance Management, Inc.