>>>>>>>If I had to choose a new language I would look seriously at the cross-platform langagues such as Java, Python or Ruby. DotNET is where M$$$ wants us all to go but why not consider alternatives to something that seems to change a lot and ONLY runs under Windows?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I wonder why some people (like Craigh Berntson) dare to focus entirely on .NET, a product that may currently be mentioned a strategic product for MS, but may as well be no longer so within a couple of years. Afterall, there is nowhere written, as to my knowledge, that MS promisses to continue development of .NET for as long as the company will remain to exist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Similarly, your observation about support for Excel and the like was sharp.
>>>>>
>>>>>Let me ask you this... and I am asking because I haven't been around that long. Has Fox ever been a strategic product for MS?
>>>>
>>>>It sure was when they bought Foxpro.
>>>>
>>>>But is being or not being a 'strategic product' a 'reason'? Isn't it rather a conclusion based on some reasons? And how about other reasons that have nothing to do with strategy, but are nevertheless important for the decision to stop or continue? If it's true that vfp is since long no longer a strategic product (which is true, in my perception) then why was it developed until now? What other reasons were there all past years to continue? What happened with those reasons, with their reasoning? What has changed?
>>>>
>>>>But let me make clear that the reasons issue is not the issue of the thread. For that I started another thread: For what reasons? Thread #1204097 Message #1204097
>>>>Rather, I'm here trying to let people do some research in their own country/environment. How does it affect their national, regional and local business?
>>>
>>>The reason I asked is because I disagree with your opinions on not using .NET because it may stop being a strategic product of MS. I think that is being too paranoid. Why use Windows, SQL Server, or really ANY product for that manner if that is your mindset.
>>
>>Oh, okay. And what arguments do you provide? Calling it too paranoid isn't really an argument. Rather, it's an evaluation, a conclusion.
>>
>>My argument is that you will nowhere in the eulas of MS find any guarantee that they will continue support for .NET, Windows and SQL Server for as long as they exist as a company. And I also are paranoid enough to assume they also nowhere promise that future OSs will be fully downward compatible with legacy systems.
>>
>>But again, this isn't really the main topic of this thread.
>
>Well, it is kind of the main topic of this thread. You have been treating the EOL of VFP as a travesty and betrayal by MS, and you have been very vocal about that. You have had plenty of time to prepare for this news and it seems to have been the general consensus for a while now. Your denial of this has been a poor business decision.

It is not the main topic of this thread. It is thread drift. As happens a lot here.

And you obviously have not been reading my posts well enough.

In one thread that I started I politely ask YAG to tell more about the reasons. No adequate reply so far. Perhaps monday. This was a legitimate request, don't you agree? Or do you regard the mere request alone already as negative and 'vocal'? For what reasons? Thread #1204097 Message #1204097

And THIS thread is an attempt to investigate the consequences, and for whom. Do you regard that too as negative and 'vocal'?

In other reactions I have taken the position of one of those who are not yet convinced that it was a wise and inevitable decision. I first need more info about the reasons. The hunches that people here have given, are hunches only.

It may be the case that most others here have kind of accepted the decision and stopped discussing it with MS, and compared to them I may appear as someone 'inclined to express oneself in words, esp. copiously or insistent', the meaning of 'vocal' you referred to, I assume. The problem for me is that each time I start an, in my eyes sensible, thread people like you think it's wise to oppose me. People like you force me to argue. I do my very best to use arguments and facts only. It's okay if people like you react with arguments and facts also. But it is mainly stupidity I have to deal with if I am attacked for being 'vocal'.

If you want to convince me, use good argumentation.