>>I happen to have met this individual on more than one occasion and think he has more integrity than that. Besides, he is a .NET MVP on merit.

I'm still polluted by training in a profession in which vendors don't get to appoint gurus. Practitioners do. If a colleague hooks up with a vendor and feeds at the teat, they're automatically an incentivized proponent unless they follow careful processes to prove impartiality which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Vendors still have to fund research and secure provider co-operation because vendors don't have access to patients, but the profession doesn't tolerate change for its own sake and vendors are responsible for proving their cool new ideas before foisting them on public or practitioners. Imagine that. ;-)

FWIW I was a MVP in 1996 and was so disgusted by (mostly VB) arrogance in the private forums that I only ever attended a couple of times. VFP always was different- we had some really good people at the top and you'll recall the VFP3 beta days which probably represented one of the most productive collaborations between vendors and practitioners ever. Didn't last long. Never will I forget the day Sigler casually agreed that MS was going to damn VFP with faint praise. Within a year I'd tried to move to Java. But that's ancient history now...