I thought maybe that was your (main) argument... MS gets a lousy license fee from the developer and NOTHING more so it is a good business decision for MS to 'end' VFP asap.

There are a few things wrong with that argument. Some include:

1) MS knew that when they bought FP in the first place, yet they still bought it.

2) Why would it be that VB users would definitively go to SQL Server (or MSDE)? There are lots of other free or low-cost or even high cost database products out there. VFP developers do it and I would guess VB developers even more so.

3) Why does it follow that MS has to make a boodle of money on every 'product' they have???? Do they make a lot of money on Internet Explorer? Do they make a lot of money on the various Windows update tools they give away?

4) MS got lots of flack from the VB developer community when they terminated VB at version 6. I wonder if they're ready for additional flack that might be forthcoming from both the VFP developer community and the installed USER base when they announce the end of VFP???? There are miles of difference between developer communities and happy installed users. Faced with a need to replace users can get sufficiently POed to say 'anything but MS to replace it' and back it up with action.

How's this for MS' longer-term business strategy... Word documents and Excel spreadsheets will integrate seamlessly with SQL Server (via XML) and fully eliminate the need for application programmers and your .NET languages will strictly be used to impart a bit of pizzazzzz to what the user sees.

cheers

>>Good that you have insight into Microsoft's revenue flows, strategies and objectives, etc. < s >
>>Personally I wish you'd share them so we can all get to the same page.
>
>OK, I'll be happy to obligue. Especially because you didn't say anything about psychic powers and the like ;-)
>
>I have no clue about Microsoft's vfp-related revenue, but as a business person, here is how I see it:
>
>VFP developers, for the most part don't represent ANY revenue for Microsoft other than the $500 they pay for a new version of vfp (much less if it's an upgrade, which in most cases, it is).
>
>When a vb developer creates an app that requires similar database power as that shown by vfp, their database back-end, in most cases, will be sql server. So, in the case of Microsoft's other developer tools, the developers become salespeople and sell even more Microsoft products, which means that the revenue stream is not limited to $500 per developer per year.
>
>Even if these developers ship their products with MSDE, that still leaves the door open for a "sooner rather than later" upgrade to full-blown sql server.
>
>Most vfp apps will NEVER be moved beyond the native database because they don't need it. See? vfp is too good for its own good.
>
>If I'm not mistaken, it was Les Pinter who brought this up years ago.
>
>I SPECULATE that vfp developers are outnumbered at least 10 to 1. We're a very small minority (speculation), albeit very loud (my opinion). Microsoft would have to piss us off rather badly for all of us to move to delphi, eiffel, python, java, haskell or what have you. I speculate (again) that even if Microsoft decided to pull the plug this afternoon on vfp, most of us would stick to Microsoft tools anyway.
>
>So, even if microsoft decides to go at it ''draconianly'', there won't be any dire consequences to their business.
>
>And even if they did pull the plug, this isn't a change that will alter our lives overnight.
>
>Regarding end users still using fpd and fpw apps, if they're your users, it's entirely up to you whether you want to continue supporting them or give them the option to have you upgrade their apps, or look for someone else to do it for them. If you have a good relationship with your customers, you may want to continue supporting their apps, but there will come a time when those apps will no longer run on the operating system of the day. I personally am a sucker for customer service and will bend backwards to try to please mine, but lately I've been wondering if it makes sense to spend an hour trying to get a new printer to work with a dos-based app running in an xp environment when a windows-based app would require no tweaking on anyone's part. Is that in my best interest? Is it in my client's best interest?
>
>I think you should make your own roadmap and inform your customers of this risk. It's not your fault, it's nobody's fault, it's just the way things are.
>
>Regarding Microsoft's strategic goal, I don't know how strategic it is for them to gain a few thousand developers (as I said, I think we, vfp developers are a very small minority). If we were strategically important to Microsoft, don't you think we would have known by now? We should be grateful that we have direct contact with the people behind our tool (Ken, Kevin, Randy, John, etc.), so much that we should be able to pick up the phone and give them a quick call with a question.
>
>Hope this clarifies where I'm coming from and that I don't have any actual insight or am privy to financial or strategic information from Microsoft.
>
>Have fun!
>
>Alex