>You know all rumors aside, the various threads about VFP's demise brings up something that does irk me somewhat:
>
>Why does MS ignore VFP like the abused step-child? I have seen documentation like this (hell its all through MSDN) where VB and VC++ are mentioned, and VFP is not, and it does start to get to me, mainly because I KNOW it can be done, because I am doing it! (At least that's what I feel like saying the guy who wrote the page)
>
>What's the deal, why doesn't MS promote VFP too? All these VFP is dead rumors are exacerbated by these omissions.
>
>Maybe we as a group need to ask MS to stop ignoring VFP in its literature and press releases if they intend to keep the language in its arsenal.
>
>Then again maybe their silence IS evidence that VFP has no strategic significance to MS, I am sure that this is a big reason for these rumors.
>
>My point is, these rumors are a result of this indifference, and we should identify what we can do (if anything) about it.
>
>When we sit here and tell each other that the language isn't going away, we are preaching to the choir. Maybe we need to organize our efforts to get MS to *say* VFP isn't going away, instead of us simply saying that MS is *not* saying VFP is going away.
>
>Any comments?

One definite reason is that threads like this keep being brought on by those who know and those who are quick to jump to conclusions.

Just look at the "VFP - dead man walking" thread after this one...

And here I am participating in another one...