>I think the customer base loyalty was yet another factor in how long VFP was extended beyond 6.0. But by the time VFP 9.0 was released, 1) the amount of sales for all versions of VFP combined annually was less revenue than Microsoft sales of Visual Studio in only one day. The cost to evolve VFP relative to the amount of money it generated (ROI) was far less than putting more resources into VS and .NET languages. Plus, some Fox team members were ready to move on or leave Microsoft, and it was nearly impossible to find qualified people to replace them. 2) The primary reason VFP was never made open source was to avoid the source code being used for a competitive product or to create/evolve a product that competes with VS. It helps to put this all into perspective if you think of VS as a competive product to VFP, even though it was owned by the same company. Remember when Apple worked on both the Mac and the Lisa computers at the same time, only one survived. In the case of VFP, it survived an entire decade after it was essentailly killed (by it no longer being strategic).
>

SNIP

Emphasis mine. 1) WOW 2) That makes business sense from MSFT's point of view.

Thanks for all your efforts on behalf of VFP. On another note, isn't it time for a new photo? :o)