>>I understand the VJ++/WFC vs VFP statement. I don't understand the next statement. Are you saying that VJ++ is the engine that runs the DHTML and ActiveX? I consider the middle tier for business rules for the data which would make VFP the better choice.<<

I mentioned that VJ++ is going to be promoted as middle tier component language, since DHTML and ActiveX are best for the client side. DHTML and ActiveX have nothing to do with Java or VJ++. I agree that VFP is a much better middle-tier for data-centric components than VJ++.

>>>I went to a beta fest last night at the NTPro user group meeting in Maryland. The speaker for IE5 spent half of his talk (10 min) about XML. They also had a speaker on Office 2000 and he said the Word document are HTML or XML if needed. <<

Almost all the new features programming wise for IE5 involves XML. XML, XSL, Behaviors (custom HTML tags using XML), etc. HTML 4.0 is the last version of HTML. The future of extending HTML will be though XML and XSL.

>>One other question. What do you see that we as VFP developers can do to increase the market? <<

There is no answer that I know of, except maybe doing all your VFP development for free. <s> It's like asking how we as citizens can increase the DOW Jones stock market level. Packaging VFP inside Visual Studio was about the best solution for increasing the market. For about 1/3 of this years DevCon in Orlando, it was their first DevCon they ever attended. I don't know what percentage of those people started using VFP after getting it with VS.