>> Geesus, what the heck do you mean by injurious, to refer to someone to an article. Talk about needing to get a life.

Perry, if Mark (and perhaps many lurkers) go to Advisor.com and shell out $5 to get the article you recommend, and searches vainly to the others you wrongly imply are there, he's not going to think too highly of you. He'll be out five bucks and ten minutes of time, all because you referred him to a totally bogus article you didn't read in a message on thread about a topic you know nothing about. So give it up. Your 10-second blurt in a message can cost Mark (and any lurkers who goes down that path) time and money.

Perry, admit it, you (and others) F'd-up. You gave poor quality information, and that's exactly what I said to Mark. I remind you that it was YOU who wrote that I was shooting my mouth off.

The problem with the article itself is Whil does not choose the headlines, I'm sure. It's easy to *think* there is an article on VFP and Palm in January FoxTalk. The difference is I read it, and you (and JVP) didn't.

Andre