I'm looking at this differently than everyone else I think. I agree that the petition will accomplish nothing in the end. Other than the fact that MSFT made the best decision for their business and nothing will change their decision other than public opinion. That is the only hope everyone has for MSFT modifying their actions even a small amount. Still, the issue for me was never whether or not it will accomplish anything, but since signing takes nothing away, support your peers and sign. I cannot see any harm in supporting our peers in this manner. There is always the very slim possibility that if enough sign and the media gets it out there enough, it could sway public opinion, and then MSFT may make some small allowance. It is all about peer support to me. I do not dispute anyone's right to sign or not sign and hold no grudge for either. I am disappointed though in the lack of support for our peers. If the argument is to choose your battle, I am missing something. Does supporting their effort preclude me from supporting any other endeavor? I don't see how. But then I don't have Craig's insight into MSFT so perhaps he knows of something coming up that he really wants to get involved in and is saving his support for that? Anything is possible. It is his perogative and I do support that.





>Tracy,
>
>Craig has links into Microsoft we don't have. He chooses not to oppose it.
>
>Walter,
>
>
>>Based on this post, I am disappointed you did not sign the petition. Why? Because while it will probably accomplish nothing as to the future of VFP, it lets MSFT know how the developer community feels and it lets the media and the public know as well. You have not explained your reason for not signing (other than it would do no good) but yet state you would love to see MSFT continue VFP. The attititude projected is defeatist. Doing nothing accomplishes nothing. What harm does signing do if you really disagree with MSFT's decision? But most importantly, it shows support of your peers, Craig. IMHO, (and this really is just my opinion, right or wrong), any VFP developer who intentionally does NOT sign, does not want to see VFP survive or does not want to take a stand publicly (yes, I did read you blogs). Harsh, I know, but it hurts nothing to sign and could potentially accomplish a lot. (Note I did write potentially). I do realize you have every right to do as you see
>>fit, and I understand that. I am just disappointed.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Just because I am an independent VFP supporter does not mean I agree with MasFox campaign. It also doesn't mean that I agree with Microsoft's decision. It simply means that I have chosen not to sign.
>>>
>>>For the record...
>>>
>>>Would I like to see Microsoft continue to develop VFP? Absolutely
>>>Do I think the MasFox campaign will change the decision? Nope
>>>At the same time, I understand Microsoft's decision. That doesn't mean I'm happy about it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Oh, I read the topic on his blog the first day he mentioned it here.
>>>>I didn't see anything astounding in it. If this is meant to show that he can buck Microsoft sometimes, it doesn't make the grade. First, he was responding to a rumour by a third party.
>>>>Secondly, it has little to do with Microsoft products and services. And I would be very surprised if he actually did anything if Microsoft did 'clamp down' on MVPs. [he chose to do nothing when Microsoft stopped future development of VFP]
>>>>
>>>>On the other hand CraigB claims to be an ardent VFP supporter. Yet he hasn't seen fit to join the other 157 Americans who have spent a measley 60 seconds of their time to sign the 'masFox' petition.
>>>>Oh sure, he **knows** it's a futile exercise and I suppose deems it a waste of his time. That's one clear way to show support for a product, wouldn't you say!
>>>>He wastes far more time writing his blog. Also to far far less potential effect.
>>>>
>>>>His position is that Microsoft does no wrong. When a screw-up is mentioned he invariably attributes it to contractors.