>We did.

To assume that people use Windows because it supports VFP is a bit of a leap.
In fact, I found the one of the key sales factors for VFP during the mid to late 90's was the fact that it was owned by MS and ran on Windows.
The people I work with were then, and still are now, using Windows because of the almost worldwide adoption of Word, Excel, Powerpoint and Outlook as defacto standards.

Another key advantage that everyone takes for granted, is the fact that any peripheral manufacturer who wants to sell a product has to have a seamless interface with Windows. Other platforms are optional.

If I told my clients that I was taking all that away from them, I'd last 5 minutes.

On a recent TV talk show, one of the guests derided an idea as being "Powerpoint deep."
Think about that for a minute and tell me again that people are using Windows because of VFP.

I've spent a lot of time recently looking at other platforms and jumping through hoops to get basic functions to work.
Take a fresh look at Windows one of these days. It's one of the greatest tech achievements in history.



>
>>I'm not sure you can quantify that.
>>
>>>They could and should have done more with VFP. This was not a misstep but a full blown strategic disaster brought upon Microsoft by Microsoft. It is as if the worst enemy of Microsoft has always been themselves (developers not included). Again, how many Win OS installations are still out there solely because of VFP apps? The answer to that is a testament to the degree of near-sightedness of MSFT. They looked at VFP sales when they should have looked at WinOS installs because of VFP. It shouldn't take a genius to see it. The very reason they bought FoxPro (strategics) is the reason why they should have continued improving it.