I share your tiredness, John, but the obstinate part of me keeps me pushing.

Though progress amounts to zilch so far, and so eagerness to continue flags continuously, I guess that I feel there's always hope while VFP is still a "supported" MS product.

I agree that "VFP does what it does very well" but it must be kept that way else we will have a 'WordPerfect' on our hands.

Cheers
Jim N

>Hi JimN ---
>
>SET SOAPBOX ON
>
>I guess I'm really tired of being a pariah in the Visual Studio family of developers. Although VFP is getting some press, there almost seems to be an active discouragement on MS part to attract new developers or use VFP for enterprise solutions. And what really frosts my ass is that most of us doggone well know that VB and Access choke on moderate to large scale 2-tier apps -- this is where VFP excels. Now, all else being equal, VB is probably more flexible for n-tier. Still, VFP does what it does very well and there is absolutely no logical reason for it to be the poor bastard stepchild of VS.
>
>SET SOAPBOX OFF
>
>>
>>I recollect JVP also complaining that VFPers really haven't "made the committment" to attend TechEd.
>>This may be true, but what should it really matter for the *content* of the session? Excluding VFP on such a basis effectively eliminates any possibility of exposure by non-VFP folk. And, as we read here, it raises the question of VFP's place in VS. If it makes *us* (VFP community) wonder then imagine what non-VFP folk must be thinking!
>>
>>Sure, attendance at VFP sessions there may well have been low, but this approach guarantees that it is ZERO. What can anyone learn from that???
>>