>>I don't think you have that strong a position on 64bit version: MS might argue that to be intended and not a bug...
>
>I don't think it was intended, it was presented to us as an impossible task, and a solid reason to drop VFP out of VS. Check the threads 2001-2003.

On 32-bit NT-based platform: Sold as? Compiled to ? Planned for?

FPD/FPW coming from DOS had 16 bit OS heritage, even if some versions targeted 386 specialities.
AFAIR vfp 3 still had ability to call into 16-bit compiled dll, as there were special calls in foxtools to load these.

IIRC that was lost in vfp6 (perhaps vfp5: did only pure vfp with that) - from that time MS might claim vfp was intended as a 32-bit OS program, even if runtime and even IDE could run under W98. Offering compatibility on 64-bit only or 64/128 bit systems might be hard to prove as claimed by MS - which would settle the case. So This might come down to which court was selected, as (at least here in Germany) some courts are famous for handing out decisions not reflected by other higher courts and later on decided against if our BGH looks at the matter... With EU High courts another level is added where biased me sees a tendency to decide against prosumer in matters of state vs. prosumer and sometimes slightly pro consumer in matters company vs. consumer.

my 22 cents of most currencies
thomas