>A friend of mine from Alaska sent me this message. Thought
>some of you might find it interesting. Sure would be nice
>to hear from a knowledgeable insider - say Ken Levy as to
>what is really going on. Anyway, for what it is worth, here
>is an excerpt of that e-mail.
>
>==========================================================
>
>Today I'm even more dismayed at M$ marketing. Attended the Visual Studio
>MSDN briefing today. They discussed middle tier and COM componants. No
>mention of Fox. I asked the speaker why not and was told it was not in
>MS strategic plan and that no other further development was being done
>on the product. When I informed her that 6.5 was due out in June she
>sounded like she knew nothing about that. She mentioned the major reason
>it was included in Visual Studio was because of the large existing
>developer base. Typical company line jargon.
>
>I've concluded that MS is waiting for this base to disapear of perhaps
>dissapate. It's all so fascinating to watch unfold.

I can understand MSs' strategy in pushing VB over VFP, considering VBs' current role in enterprise tools such as Visual Modeler. However, I wouldn't expect MS representatives to promulgate the 'Fox is Dead' myth to an audience of 50 to 60 IT professionals and corporate decision-makers, IF IN FACT, IT WASN'T TRUE!

I mentioned the performance advantages of using VFP as a middle tier. This was downplayed with the reply, "Only if it's optimized." I replied, "Is their any other way?" Perhaps optimization would be a sticking point if one were creating the middle tier with a wizard.

As a VFP developer in Anchorage, her statement only hindered my marketability. After returning to the state after a 1 ½ year hiatus, I now understand why a fellow developer told me that Anchorage was a VB city. I guess it's time to get out in the business community and take a proactive role in dispelling the misconceptions.

Joe