David (my responses interspersed (and since I cannot do the fancy stuff you do, they don't stick out so nicely as your). . .

>Jim,
>
>>Why not find some way AMONGST OURSELVES to develop/agree on a consensus Wish List and THEN present it to MS and the VFP Team and ask them to respond?
>
>Do you really believe that developers as a group can come to a consensus on the ERs? I doubt it very seriously, we all have vastly different areas of where we each want to see product improvement focused. I'm pretty sure that MS keeps a tally of how many requests they get for particular features and they work on them according to internal priorities that none of us outside MS are privy to.
>

Yes, I do think that there is a very good chance that the few hundred here could and would come up with a "group" wishlist.
Furthermore, I believe that we likely could prioritize them all too! But I'll admit that yours is the easier way out.

>I don't think having a "group" wishlist, of the couple of hundred UT developers here, with everyone casting their votes for which of them they want to see really carries much more weight than those same wishes sent directly to Microsoft by each developer.
>

I feel it *could* make a huge difference. For instance, we could collectively put more meat on the bones. One liners (as many of them appear in the UT Wish List) would, of necessity during discussion, be expanded and excerpts from those dialogues could consitiue additional substance for the wish.

>>If they choose not to respond, then possibly (in light of Gates/Ballmer alleged statements) we could escalate within MS, and if they do respond, then we are well on the way to getting what we need and want.
>>
>>At the very least this would give us a chance to see if we can even succeed at this before getting anyone else involved *AND* we would all learn lots in the process.
>
>I don't know of too many companies that broadly forecast what will be in the next release of any product. Market competition being just one factor in such announcements.
>

I'm really not asking them to forecast *anything*. In the mainframe world we had (and they still exist) "GUIDE" and "SHARE" organizations which did precisely this kind of thing for IBM issues. There each area of IBM was hit with individual lists and they committed to reply to each. They made no "promises" (or, actually, only rarely did) on any issue, but much of what was asked for was eventually incorporated. They also did something to remove (formally) some issues, giving reasons when doing so.

>Send your ERs to foxwish@microsoft.com, even if you don't get feedback about what you send, they do take the wishes seriously. Granted it would be nice if we got feedback something like: "you are the 345th request for this feature", "cool idea!", "please don't bother us with any more lame ideas like this"

I simply do not believe this, no matter who, or how often, the contrary is stated by MS/VFP folk. My experience is exactly the opposite, and this was long before I became so vocal here. And I have already related how one (and one only) got a positive response, yet nothing even close was delivered!

Regards,

Jim N