Mike,

>>I don't think he did say VFP is inadequate. Technology
>>is not and never has been the issue. Market perception
>>is the issue. The market perceives FoxPro as a dead
>>product. You seem to be in denial about that.

Believe me when I say that I am defiantly not in denial. I have been working with xBased languages for over 23 years now and have been working with C, C++, MASM, FORTRAN, VB, VB.Net and a handful of other languages all along the way so with me, change isn't the issue either. I agree that VFP is viewed as a dead language by the market and perhaps you are right that may be Craig's issue as well. I doubt it though. I'm guessing that he believes that the .Net languages are superior to VFP. The thing that sticks in my craw is that I don't see anything wrong with VFP as a language and it irks me that I have one less tool to work with now and for no reason.

Thanks,

Steve