John.....


>>Very well. Your assignment, assuming you are up to the task, is to re-write the guy's letter in a way that would not be a "half-truth"...

Simple... a thrid grader could do it.

If you are having trouble with aging applications and can not find the critical support that you need... give us a call.... we believe we can help.

No mention of a specific product... no chance of offence.

Even the man who wrote the letter admits that if his shop ever got a "marketing" peice even slightly critical of Lotus that he would "have to wear a flack jacket" He understands and applauds product loyality. What can't you?


>>Why then was it marketed to so many FOX developers? Humm... that does not strike you as worth thinking about? Surly a legal mind would want to investigate that! < s >


>Who besides Fox developers have aging Fox applications???? Seems like a logical place to start.

Your talking out of both sides of your mouth John. You originaly wrote to me that the letter was for non technical people. So my response was to that issue. You are now raising others and your logic is circular and flawed.

It is perfectly understandable for a developer to feal threatened by a large shop directly trying to cut into their support of legacy applications.


>>It is in your client's best interest for you, the developer, to have an open mind...

Hummm... so you would say that totally dismissing Fox as a possible option in upgrading an older Fox application is having an OPEN mind? You would say that leading a client to spend a lot of extra money on SQL-Server when it might not be necessary is having an OPEN mind?

>Yes, you over-stated the point...

Well at least one of us can admit it! :)

>>Anyway, I won't take any more of your time. There are too many people that need your help with their important technical questions. < vbg >

>Lame sarchasm duly noted...

Once again John you interject your feelings into a simple complement and twist it around. There was not one ounce of sarchasm in that statement at all. I don't play the sarchasm game. You have a lot to offer the users that need answers to questions but you are so involved in argument that you miss your calling. It was a sincere compliment and wish for you. The < vbg > meant that I think you very well could find a lot more to grin about if you would spend more time helping people and less time doing the very whinning you accuse everone else of.