>Hi JohnK!
>
>Snippage
>
>>I second the motion. However, it's difficult to think in those terms where it's a small-moderate size project with one or two developers. There are not very many developers out there who can single-handedly write an application using VFP,VB, maybe VC++, and SQL Server and Oracle.
>
>And the fact of the matter is that there are far more small-medium sized applications (and companies) out there than there are BIG ones!
>
>Craig and JVP both are focusing on "middle tier", which of course means that there is little or no need to improve the UI aspects of VFP at all. On the other hand, if VFP continues to do such a poor job with ActiveX components and continues to have non-standard screen objects (Windows-wise), it will have to go the way of the dinosaur all on its own.

Middle-tier is the direction Microsoft is going. I currently have several projects going on...alll of which are 100% VFP. The biggest one will eventually migrate to SQL Server backend, but that is at least a year away.

>I'm really unclear what "play nice with VS components" actually means when in fact VFP hardly plays at all with any of VS *and* JVP in particular seems to accept that that will continue to be the case!

"Play nice" means that VFP creates components that can be used by the other languages and that VFP can use compenents created by the other languages. It also means VFP can use the other VS tools.

>
>At this point the future of VFP can be categorize as DISMAL. If the VFP Team can simply focus on the small-medium business/project and let VFP continue to be a 'complete solution' for such, then things could change.
>
>Jim N