>What??? Here is the link: http://www.dbase.com/Cnt/OpenSource.htm
>
>I found it to be replete with detail. What? Did you assume open source meant the dBase language - right away - was going to be open source? Please. Let's say you had the source to VFP. What would you do with it any?

No, I didn't assume anything, that's why I read the article. The heading on their site is:

dB2K - Much Easier, Much Faster, Much More Portable and Decidedly Open Source!

http://www.dbase.com/FrmCnt/Frmourmission.htm

It is not decidedly open source. Decidely open source would indicate the product is open source. It is not. Your comment was:

>It will be interesting to see if they go forward with a Linux version. If Linux does take off - it would appear they will be positioned very well.

Suggesting that they would appear to be positioned well if Linux takes off is simply wrong. Linux is open source. Not just the tools. The Linux community has enough problems with Sun's proprietary Java, so what makes you think they are going to jump on the dB2K wagon for some open source tools?

>>And I loved the founder's comments on VFP and VB:
>>
>>http://www.dbase.com/Frm/ModuleCompany.htm
>>
>>VFP's editors work with "snippets", not with source code files and VB has no inheritance.
>>
>>Is that supposed to be some stinging rebuttal of VFP? And I think we know were
>you stand on VB's inheritance.
>
>
>That is all you took from the site? Too bad...

No, it would just be nice to see a little objectivity. When the VFP crowd bashes VB's lack of inheritance, you bash back. When the dBase crowd bashes it, you notice its nice features list.