>>Your point is all shared by the people of this forum. I think we all t hink the same on this. This is why 2 weeks ago I started to be more involved with MS people and exchanged a few emails with them. I also asked them to state the actual position of VFP 6 because it was a common question on the Universal Thread and that it is about time we have a statement coming from the top.
>
>As far as I understand the concerned expressed here, it's not only about "will it be a version 6.0 or not?"
>
>I think it's more: what's the future of VFP on a long run, what about the MS support for VFP, how about some good VFP books, improved documentation, etc. Not necessarily the best news, but it seems to me that peoples want to know something for sure, to exit from this very long incertainty.
>
>>Again, we have several people from MS who surf this site. I know that the ones from the MVP program are doing a regular visit. But, all they can do is to forward our requests to the development team because they are 2 differents departments.
>
>I don't want to blame somebody. Probably everybody is trying to do his/her job. But I'm sure that somebody must do something about all these concerns.
>
>>I heard that they are working hard on VFP 6 so this might be a reason why it's going slowly on this. Also DevCon is coming and the testing stage as well.
>
>This has almost nothing to do with this thread. This is not a technical thread and I don't think that the development team must answer these questions.
>
>>I can tell you what I know but not why I don't. :) And, when I say that I am waiting for a statement, yeah, it is. :)
>
>You're right. :) And I would like to know more opinions on that. Maybe I'm wrong... :)
>
>Vlad
It would seem strange for MS to drop a product that is installed in so many user sites. At the save time VB and C are the 'invented here' home boys. I have expected the following.

VB gets a VFP like object model overtime, one that is closer to C++ than the object orient flat structure VB has today
VFP evolves into a data engine (with it's on language front end for backward compatability and us with data drive/data intensive application) with a very friendly VB/C++ server characteristics.
Visual Studio masks the merge by starting with many diverse products behind a common front end to move people off product specific solutions to a more component construction mode and the products change on the 'unseen' backend of Visual Studio. This would allow MS to still support the current verticle slice product solutions and not have to maintain many similar but different design layers. Plus the 'best of breed' transaction/true compiled/low level/data driven P-Code can be fitted together without the developer getting involved (even if they want to)
Only my take on where they seem to be headed.

Interesting to note that MS is also getting into IBM's backyard (and I mean the private MVS yard) with their data respository and linkup with Platium Technologies (A long term MAIN FRAME player) hmmmmmm. Would a VB/VFP front to native DB2 be an interesting entrance in the halls of the 'DATA CENTER'. Think data warehousing. That's where the monster corp interest lay today.
Gary