Hi,

What MS is doing is the most logical thing for them. Too bad it is not for us. Imagine (dream) for a moment you were Bill G. It is far more economical to delevop a single language (VB over VFP) than two languages.

Moreover, if a developer programs in VB, each one of his customers has to purchase Access, at the very least. And since Access is a slowpoke, pretty soon they will be moving to SQL Server. VFP, on the other hand, has a wonderful included database (certainly not as secure as SQL server, but faster), so the argument that VFP competes with SQL server is true, at least in some cases.

So there are two wins for MS for in getting rid of VFP. Naturally, they don't want us going anywhere else (Powerpoint, C++ something or another, or whatever), nor do they want the Attorney General following them, so they are continuing to advance VFP. We are lucky. I appreciate what the FoxTeam is doing keeping MS advancing FP. I, for one, admire VFP and will stay.

Perhaps eventually VB will acquire the things we admire in VFP (mostly an elegant syntax, especially its native SQL select statement, and an included database) and there will not be a reason to stay with FP.

For now, MS is being very smart and promoting VB to the new generation. They don't even know VFP exists.

Alex


>>Oops. Yeah, I meant Craig. Sorry Jim. I know that there is room for many different views on the topics we're all discussing, why else have a discussion right? Many of these topics are grey areas or touch on personal preference.
>>
>>I just think that Craig was off base on his response to my original thread, particularly concerning the marketing effort behind VFP. He came off as if he was pontificating. Look back at the first few msgs in the thread and read the mktg dialog.
>>
>>It's all well and good to have opinions but if you have to defend your opinions with nonsense it might be time to get a new opinion. Know what I mean? The statement that (paraphrasing) 'it isn't MSs business to influence what languages kids are learning' is preposterous. In fact, that's exactly what they should be doing. This is something the Cigarette mfgs and Apple figured out long ago. Hook a kid (or a student) and you've likely got him for life.
>>
>>MS has always been afraid that pushing FP and VFP would erode marketshare for their VB franchise. Anyone who believes, (despite what MS says) that they (MS)are firmly committed to increasing VFPs marketshare regardless of it's impact on VB - is NUTZ. They are pushing VFP just hard enough to satisfy the VFP community
>
>Obviously, according to many here, they are not. Otherwise these complaints wouldn't be posted. So, before you gripe about my posts, take a look at your own. At th 96 DevCon in Scottsdale, VFP 5.0 was introduced. Microsoft stood up and said "We screwed up the marketing of VFP 3.0 and we're going to change it." They made a HUGE effort to do so. They could have gotten any marketing people, but they didn't. They, in fact, hired two Fox people to handle VFP marketing. Robert Green was a longtime Fox developer and trainer in Chicago. David Lazar worked for Fox Software before the merger. I wonder how many product groups can tout their lead marketing people have actually used the product or know it as intimately as they do.
>
>>but well short of what it would take to broaden it's usage, or increase it's mindshare.
>
>Would I like to see more marketing of VFP? Yes! Of course I would.
>
>>MS should see to it that kids coming along see VFP as a contender, a viable alternative (spare me the Visual Studio everybody works together song and dance) to VB that is superior in many ways.
>
>Does MS know that VFP is superior in many ways to VB? Yes...I've heard Bill G. say this. Will they market it differently? No. VFP's user base is growing so obviously marketing must be doing something right.
>
>>
>>Sorry Walter, I know you didn't sign up for that diatribe.