Javier,

I disagree that 3 developers is not enough. We're talking 3 highly professional and experienced developers. In fact, these same three were solely responsible for VFP 9 RTM and most of the VFP 8 work.

These guys are under pressure to perform in other areas in Visual Studio as well.


>I guess the bottom line is that Microsoft is behaving like a small (very small) software company, and in a very irrespectul way towards its developers and customers; in the end VFP users are their customers, like it or not, they bought a product from them and deserve a response much better than SP2.
>
>When you buy software from Microsoft you expect that more the 3 developers are working on your solution (as John Koziol said in a thread). That's too little people by any MS standard, and a insult to VFP developers given MS size. I do not know if something can be done, but if there is any petition to sign I would be more than happy to stamp mine. It is not to tell MS to develop 5 more versions, it is to tell them to stand by their quality standards, and their promises (this SP2 is not support till 2015). If they promise support till 2015, please give it, and at least keep the product running in the most recent MS operating system (ie fix the little Vista issues at least). Frankly, I thought MS was a more serious company.
>
>If they don have the money, I wouldn't mind to pay a monthly fee to support MS developers to keep working in SP2 and Sedna, but seriously working. And I know they have the money, so what's the point in doing this? They have stopped releasing more versions, that's OK, we all know, but please release a decent SP2 and Sedna as you promised. Are MS going to loose so much respect for so little money? It seems so, and I just cannot understand it, I would not be able to make such a thing to any of my customers.
>
>>I've read some of the SP2 threads. And I've read various complaints about certain features no longers working in SP2. The bantering seems to go back and forth as to whether or not features have been broken by SP2.
>>
>>What is the bottom line?
>>Does SP2 break some traditional features of VFP9?