Please accept my apologies, I realize I am partly shooting the wrong guy here, but I am not able to find who was my intended target. I am not able to see all the messages in this thread, IE keeps reporting errors when I try to open the whole thread.

Anyway, this is not the first time I aim at the wrong target, and it's not the first time I misinterpret or mix up what someone writes. In this case I read a few messages about the NN/AK case, a case where I feel strongly that none of us, except the involved persons, has any right to make any judgments, We have heard a few fragments about what have happened, but since most of what has been told and shown only come from one part of this, it is totally unfair to make any conclusions. That AK does not comment on this does not necessarily mean that he doesn't want to, but he may be in a position where he simply can't say anything at all, for legal reasons. I don't know, I don't want to know, and I don't want to speculate. But without all the facts, no conclusion can be made. I simply can not see it any other way.

But, to clear up n this matter, this is why I jumped at you, even though I added a few things which I should not have done...: I don't agree with you regarding Andy's comments about the community being partly to blame for the death of VFP, because I think he has a valid point. Could he have expressed himself differently? Sure, but Andy is Andy, and he wrote this in his own blog where he must have the right to say whatever he wants without having to defend it later. We may agree to disagree, but I think you judge hm too hard for writing just what he meant.

>Well, that's a bit different. Thanks for clarifying. But why do you say "can't or won't"? Who do you refer to, specifically? This is a public forum. Anyone can participate. Andy has chosen not to participate here, but I have directed comments directly to him via his blog, also. People are throwing around "generosity of spirit" and "class act" comments here. I finally decided to question that and offered my feelings on why I don't agree. If someone can't defend themselves, I would not criticize. Does Andy fall into that category? I don't know of any reason he would. Won't defend? I think he has defended his opinion, but very little if any here, mostly elsewhere. I tire of the argument about his comments, but I did feel he treated the community in an unfair and unjust fashion and was glaringly wrong in his comments. I found them insulting and I believe others did, also.
>
>>Please understand that I attack you for actually critisizing other people who can't or won't defend themselves, not for the context of what you actually write. I hope you understand the very important difference. I don't care WHAT you write, but I care THAT you write.
>>
>>>You said "You know one part of a story, and with this information you are able to make profound conclusions." Well, aren't you doing the same thing, Tore? In your first paragraph you said you didn't even read what Andy wrote, yet did not hesitate to jump in. That sounds like knowing NO part of the story. I know what Andy wrote, I know how people responded to it, and I know what I wrote back to him and posted to others. That's more than one part and it's infinitely more than you know about the situation, by your own admission, so don't talk to me about "throwups."
>>>
>>>
>>>>First of all, I have not read what Andy wrote about the community killing VFP, but one thing I do know, is that a very high number, maybe as high at 60-70%, of all VFP used in eastern Europe and in the far east, are illegal copies. Did I also mention that VFP is extremely popular in eastern Europe and in the far east? I know that this was one of many reasons why MSFT made the business decision to "force" people to use products which they could earn money for almost every installation, namely MSQL.
>>>>
>>>>Secondly it is shocking how some people feel free to write exactly what they want about other people, but don't accept that other people do exactly the same, when they don't agree with what the others say. You fall into this category, and this is why I am so appauled. You know one part of a story, and with this information you are able to make profound conclusions. Enough said, I don't want to waste more time reading more of your "throwups'"
>>>>
>>>>>Perhaps I did insult some people. That would be the people that think like Andy - that it's the communities fault that VFP was EOLed.
>>>>>
>>>>>The logic is simple:
>>>>>
>>>>>M$ buys VFP
>>>>>M$ ignores VFP marketing (marketing works, M$ knows lack of marketing also works)
>>>>>This sends the "we don't care about this product message"
>>>>>Many people decide they'd better move to other products
>>>>>When enough people leave and sales drop, M$ says "oh, no one's buying it, let's kill it"
>>>>>Andy blames the community for this chain of events
>>>>>
>>>>>Sorry, you may see it like Andy does, but I - and others - see where the root of the problem stems from and that's M$. I was disappointed that people left and would not stick it out and keep buying and using the new versions, but that's a far cry from blaming them (and the ones who did stick it out). After all, it's hard to fight the 8 billion pound gorilla. I'm not going to blame people for leaving, but I did encourage people to stay and support the product. However, they made a business decision. Andy claims to understand business decisions, but he criticizes the community for a real business decision ("the writing on the wall") and defends M$ for a false and dishonest business decision.
>>>>>
>>>>>Are you offended? You shouldn't be. What you should do is think this through more carefully and place the blame where it really lies instead of on your fellow developers. Hopefully you can do that.