Actually, I read the whole thread before saying anything. I love Fox as much as anyone here and I am sure I have been working with it as my primary development tool as long as anyone here. I completely agree with you on what decisions i wish Microsoft had made.

BUT - Rick Strahl said it correctly - Microsoft is entitled to make whatever strategic choices they like. We can agree or disagree, but they are answerable only to their stockholders and only based on performance.

I think everyone inside and outside of Microsoft for the last five years at least has made it clear that VFP was not part of Microsoft's long term plans. I am sorry that is true and I still make my living developing VFP applications and I intend to do so for as long as it is in my best interests to do so.

But I also understand a little of how business works and I don't really believe there is any value in asking "Why" when it has been as clear as can be that Microsoft is betting the farm on the CLR and that means VFP is not strategic. What more explanation do you need ? You may not like the answer but it is certainly a coherent answer.

So, I go back to my original point - not getting the answer you want is not the same as not getting an answer.

Do you know YAG's history with Foxbase/Foxpro ? Remember Flash? Codebook? Do you think he and Ken Levy did not exert what influence they could to keep the Fox alive - probably at times risking pissing off other people at MS ? Didn't you notice it when EPS made a major push toward helping VFP developers migrate their skills to a new technology? Did you think they didn't know what Microsoft had in mind? Do you read Code Magazine?

Markus and Rick and Rod and a whole lot of other people who had status and market share and many apps in VFP started saying at least five years ago that they were exploring other tools. This did not sneak up on us. We can still use VFP as long as we like for existing apps. We can migrate to other tools as we see fit.

I think that in this forum there has been a 'political correctness' encouraged that caused people to often turn on anyone who was saying anything they didn't want to hear, somehow believing that if we stayed pure and faithful and closed our minds to any evidence of change that the change would somehow not happen. Admirable orthodoxy in some ways, perhaps, but not a particularly usefull approach to preparing for the future.

I agree with and admire your passion, i just think energy directed at trying to browbeat Microsoft or its employees into reversing a strategic direction on which they have risked a lot more than you have is adolescent. What difference does the answer to "Why" make? The only question is : Is the decision subject to change or outside influence? I think it is pretty clear the answer to that is "No" so now the question should be "Where do I go from here ?"

The energy would be better spent in continuing developing VFP applications and positioning oneself for the future.

I know that over the last 20 or more years I've made a lot more money from Microsoft than Microsoft has ever made from me. I'd consider that a pretty good deal and wish I could set up a similar relationship with the rest of the corporate world.

As the Tofflers pointed out so clearly almost forty years ago, the only thing we can be certain of is change, and that the rate of change will increase. So if you want to become an expert in something - become and expert in changing!

>>Hey Alan
>>
>>I think it is very difficult for some people to realize that not getting the answer they want is not the same as not getting an answer. < s >
>
>Welcome in the thread. Hope you read more of it before commenting any further. :(