Hi Jeff,

>Jimbo,
>
>I really don't think that we are not being heard - the FoxTeam constantly monitors threads on the UT.
>

They may well monitor the UT (and other facilities) but the evidence is very strong that it amounts to extremely little by way of ACTIONS.
For instance, there are several problems commonly raised by folks who are newer to VFP. You can count on them to come up like clockwork in any forum like this.
These are things where some small clarifications in the documentation (specifically the Help) would put an end to these questions.
Does the Help get updated to resolve this once and for all? NO!
And these don't even involve changes to code!


>The UT is always full of intelligent "wish list" discussions including, I might add, the recent can-of-worms you started concerning the RELEASE command and dangling object references. While I did not participate in that thread, I followed it closely, learned a few things, and incorporated them into my framework. I like to steal solutions wherever I find them and usually make them better by putting my own twist on them - kinda what Microsoft does, but on a much smaller scale.
>
>Soon, I will be contributing some of my own stuff in the Files area and making more time to assist others where I can - that is what the FoxCommunity is all about.
>

That'll be great, and I sure agree that the Fox community is a rare species in that sharing is rampant. But what about the RESPONSIBILITY that MS, and the VFP team in particular, has to those same users??
That the VFP team is overworked should not really become OUR problem, yet it has.

>One thing I learned a long time ago is that many features that are not built into a product can be implemented with a little ingenuity - that is what good programming is all about.
>
That's true for *some* things, but decidedly not for others (like, for instance, proper ActiveX support). And there are enough workarounds for problems that, if one counts on something to develop some 'missing' piece, there is a good chance of a language problem somewhere along the way.

>However, I do think that MS should keep us informed about new features, enhancements, etc. that are on the drawing board as well as new technologies that help to support their grandiose schemes so that we may be better prepared when these things are shoved down our throat.
>
I couldn't agree more!!!

>Hell, I would give anything if they would just post all of the VFP 6.0 "known issues". I KNOW there alot more than just 28 of them and it would sure save me alot of time waisted tearing my f****** hair out!
>
This is yet another area where we lost big-time compared to the old Fox Software practises. Is MS so vain as to want to pretend that there are no issues in VFP? What gives with this approach??? How does it benefit anybody???

Cheers,

Jim N

>
>>Hi Jeff,
>>
>>You have a top-ten wish list, I have a top three, JimB has some too, etc.
>>
>>I have no idea how to accomplish it, but wouldn't it be very interesting if we *all* (all of UT) had some way to discuss wishes **in some depth** and come to a consensus for a series of items. These could then be forwarded to MS for a response.
>>
>>I tried to discuss a shortcoming (my opinion) of the RELEASE command recently but all I got was flack, so I soon saw the wisdom of giving up the issue (even though it is still claer to me that there *is* a problem in need of fixing there).