>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>You should. As the current public perception of the tool progresses, it will become more and more marginalized. >Declining markets die. And the tools within them die as well.

I tend to agree. If the "market" chooses to leave VFP in the dust, then we should be flexible enough and smart enough to adjust, instead of whinning about how MS is doing VFP injustice.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It really depends on your situation (something not talked about much in most of these threads). We do not all make our money programming the same way. Some of the folks on the UT have jobs at companies that are committed to FoxPro (and maybe are driven in their comments more by love of the language than any real concern over their jobs). Others have jobs at companies that are in flux regarding software, and dread the idea of going to a less technically robust and RAD language, at which they will be less adept; quite understandable. Others are consultants -- at some consulting jobs, they might have control over what tool to use, while at others they are forced to defend or even fight a losing battle for using FoxPro.

What makes a good language? Well, certainly the following: ease-of-use, technical superiority, a good mix of RAD features and OOP. But certainly, part of the answer is "whatever makes you the most money." Right? Or am I being REALLY cynical here?

If I am not, and "whatever makes you the most money" does indeed matter at least a bit, then sometimes VFP wins (you can do a lot in a little time but still charge a good deal) but sometimes VB or some other langauge wins (more jobs, more opportunities, higher rates [at least here in NYC]).

It all depends on your situation....