Jim (and Malcolm),

>So I take you back to my original position - let all of the dreams flow freely, with lots of discussion, and let Microsoft decide.

I agree with this. I think it's best to have a free exchange of ideas and let the Team tell us what's feasible.

The most important part of proposing new ideas is justifying them by showing how they are worth the (imagined) effort and how they would benefit more than just a few VFP developers.

If it's something that already has a workaround, then it would be wise to make a very strong case for the change or show why the existing workaround is insufficient, etc.

If it's something that already has a third-party solution, it would be wise to explain why (aside from $) having the Team work on it would be a better option.

So, Malcolm's ideas for an acid test should not be used to stop someone from proposing new features or changes, but perhaps should be used by the proposer as a filter and reality check to be sure the proposal makes a strong enough case or explains well enough the insufficiency of the workaround/third party solution.

Just my opinion.