>>> Our user group member was totally frustrated by his initial attempts to
>>get
>>> the damn thing working because no one ever mentioned to him that the
>>older
>>> ODBC driver wouldn't cut the mustard. He kept making the false
>>assumption
>>> that it was something that he was or wasn't doing from his efforts that
>>was
>>> causing the problem. A simple statement by MS to the fact that the old
>>> driver didn't have a sonowball's chance in hell of working would have
>>saved
>>> him hours and hours of wasted time and frustration.
>>
>>Carl,
>>the fact it was an ODBC problem was discussed in MS newsgroups (In the
>>visual interdev newsgroup if I remember correctly) long before MS released
>>the updated drivers
>>it is true though (to my knowledge) there was nothing public/official from
>>MS
>
>It is not only Microsoft that depends on the newest ODBC drives but
>most software vendors. The latest OCX I installed did not work with
>the original ODBC VFP driver.
>
>I don't think anything is wrong with software vendors expecting
>programmers to have the latest versions of drivers loaded on a
>machine. Programmers are supposed to be more sophisticated then
>general users and should keep updated on things like drivers.
>
>But that said and $1 can just get you a cup of coffee.

I think it the core of the discussion here is the lack of communication between Microsoft & VFP people. If something does not work or is not available yet or, for that fact, a newer version is available then we should be properly informed. The problem is MS concentrates on VB & Access so any real development or testing with VFP is left to "in the field" testing. No a very pretty sight.

Look at the InterDev example. The demo app works like a champ with Access but the VFP people are pulling hair. No VFP example. If InterDev is supposed to be a Visual Studio 97 product then there should have been a VFP example. VFP "is" part of the Visual Studio 97 suite, right?

My 4 cents,
Tom


Tom