---snipped
>
>Simply for marketing purposes. What's the difference between a Ford Taurus and a Mercury Sable? How about a Chevy Blazer and a GMC Jimmy?
>
Yep, and for marketing purposes, VFP is to be held back on various fronts. Marketing obviously takes on different flavours, depending on true objectives, eh. Maybe if we were let in on some of these objectives, rather than being left guessing (and defending THEIR choices from uninformed but wishful positions), we could all sing from the same songbook.
>
--- more snippage
>
>Face it, Jim, no tool will ever do everything. Even if it does, it won't do any of them well (see Works).

I'm not asking for it to do everything. I am asking for them to address, in a certain way which I feel is quite simplistic, a very big hole in an otherwise acceptable format called the "DBF structure" - it's inherent sensitivity to corrpution due to sudden power loss.

BUT. . . I will face the fact that noone but noone except me seems to be pushing for this, even now that (I think) I have explained the concept reasonably clearly.
I guess I shall just sit back and watch many many people fondly wish for things and diligently fill out Wish Lists items and continue to trust in VFP "grand plan" when virtually nothing of whats asked for (and therefore NEEDED) is delivered, and then watch all of them make up various excuses as to why this is so.
We have the tail (MS) wagging the dog (developers), and that's the way people seem to like it. The DoJ might just as well put the suit aside and concede to MS right now!

Disappointedly,

Jim N