>Hi Greg,
>
>>No way -- the end of development came due to lack of revenue stream. MS is a business and like all businesses, they only pursue avenues that will make money. The VFP community was its own worst enemy in this -- how many developers are still on VFP6? How many bought upgrades for VFP7, VFP8, and VFP9? From what I have read -- most VFP applications are still on VFP6. I have developed tools for VFP9 and many developers have asked for backward compatibility with VFP6 -- why because they don't have VFP9 (let alone 7 or 8).
>>
>>So just because there is another product out there that might compete with VFP will not perk MS's desire to rebuild the VFP team...
>
>The end of development did NOT come from the lack of revenue stream. I wasn't directly involved with the numbers, but I do know that our take from MSDN sales and other sales were more than sufficient to float the product. Yes, some tightening was done, for example, the drop of SKU-ed localized versions in 8 and 9. And our budget for resources was constrained for VFP 9 but not fatally so.
>
>The community was (and is) not the worst enemy. Quite the contrary; the strength and vociferousness of the community was a huge factor in there being a VFP 8 and VFP 9. Look who's carrying the torch for VFP now .... community efforts.
>
>As to devs clinging to older versions, just look at the VB community. There are TONS of VB developers who will not leave VB 6 for ..Net. Tons. It's not something unique to VFP and, actually, IMHO not a huge problem in the VFP world.

You go, boy!