>>Now, unless I am wrong, despite the last statement, there is nothing listed here that would prevent a VFP SP3 developer from writing a poolable component, unless (a reasonable possibility) there is something I don't understand about TLS, FTM, or IObjectControl within the context of a VFP MTDLL. Can someone answer this question? And if we can write poolable components, shouldn't we get M$ to revise this document?
>>
>
>I don't know enough about COM+ or how COM is implemented internally in VFP to comment on this. However, if VFP cannot currently participate, I'm sure it will be modified to do this as COM+ is EXTREMELY important to MS. We need to remember that there are always lags between OS changes and applications that can take advantage of the OS improvements.

Right. But part of my point was, might this be an opportunity where VFP was capable of doing something that nothing else besides C++ in the MS suite was currently capable of? Would be a good selling point for VFP, and we certainly need those...