Nice response John. Hopefully, the M$ boys will set them straight.

While I totally agree that it should be up to Joe Developer to recommend
the proper tool (just as the plumber does) sometimes it does not work that
way. For instance, I was recently told by a VFP developer that a Fortune
100 company prohibits the use of VFP. Why? Because some no-mind high-level
manager read some misinformation and made it company policy. Strange but
true!

In this specific case the developer was allowed to complete just this one project but that was it. Apparently, he was 1/2 done with the project before
the directive came down. They were actually asked to provide a bid on
re-writting the software in Access - Yikes!

That is why these misinformed statements SHOULD be addressed. I thank
you John for your great response to Robert Green.

>The following is a cut-and-paste of the note I just sent to Robert Green:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>There is a website that is posting a "news" article that lays out some misinformation about VFP. The gist of it is that all FPW2.6 apps should be moved to Access/VB and that MS support of VFP is waning. These are the sorts of things that cause VFP developers concerned and are a direct insult/threat to our livelihoods and our preferred development tool.
>
>Would you please look at the site, and if you agree with my assessment, send some sort of response? Many of us in the general VFP community would, but it would carry much more weight if Microsoft manager of your stature would respond.
>
>Thank you for your time.
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Let's hope he responds.