>>I don't agree that Microsoft bought Fox to spite Borland. It seems like a long time ago now but they were genuinely in a battle to be the #1 development tools vendor. And I don't think Fox could have advanced FoxPro the way Microsoft did. If you look at VFP 9 compared to FoxPro 2.5, they took it light years forward.
>
>On the other hand, Fox Software had plans - published, no less - for future developments. The only one that sticks is a "client-server version". Data Base Advisor used to track their various projects' progress regularly.
>So who knows. I'm not disappointd at all with the path Microsoft took (to VFP) but it is a shame of the first order that they STILL don't see that DATA is what businesses buy computers to process.

That puzzles me quiet a bit. I tought with all b$ budgets that they have at their disposal they could afford better marketing research into
customer's spending patterns.

It is happening all over the world;
You had at first small company with few dusty&rusty computers running god knows what on them. Then they order affordable app at the corner VFP shop.
So they buy at first one solid PC with windows and office on it.
Then as time passes buy they realise they need server, and so for.
In a matter of 3-4 years we ar talking about small network. Then
they want to connect to their office in another city, and then we have more
servers and more networks, and so for ...

At this point how much is indirect revenue for MS ?
Do they really think that would sell all this without that very same
VFP corner shop ? Did anybody bother to analyse how meny
power points, frontpages, excels, words were purchased and then
used sparingly if ever. Well there was no real need for them but they came along anyway. All that was needed business wise, was infrastructure for that vfp app to do the business.

Somehow, it doesent add up to me when I hear statement like
'It is just business decision, because VFP brings no income and is just
headache to maintain...'

If they wanted to make glamurous dev tool for glamurous Fortune500 type
developments that is just fine with me, but why cutting on grassroots ??

This is not exactly 'green' aproach, and it might eventually fire back at them. Linux now, is what DOS used to be in the era of mainframes.
Very simillar nature cycle might happen again very easily.

Show me the first stable lin-x-base product emerging out there, and then
in 5 or 10 years we can talk about spending patterns again...