This is slightly different way of looking at your question. Here is what I would like to the product to be in 2001:


Taken out of Visual Studio.....

The implications of this are:

1. It can get away from the scrutiny of not really being part of VS.
2. It could be released earlier. The product is essentially complete.
3. Acknowledges the desktop application market is worth supporting.


The downside....

I don't see a significant downside. Most folks that purchase VS don't do so with the intention of using VFP.


IMO, the only chance VFP has is for MS to once and for all recognize that the desktop application market is a legitimate market that should continue to be served. MS needs to once and for all realize that a strategy such as Dot Net and Desktop-based applications are not mutually exclusive. In fact, both strategies can co-exist. To not acknowledge that a significant amount of work is done in the desktop arena is to not acknowledge reality. It is a viable market and one worth making an investment.

It is time to stop coercing VFP developers to go to the Dot Net platform. Those that want to go will go. Yes, there should be a migration path. However, it must be voluntary - not one in which the indoctrination is via thumbscrews. It is clear that VFP developers want VFP to remain true to its roots. That said, here are some areas I would like to see addressed in 2001-02:


1. Once and for all - get rid of 2.x compatibility.
2. Tools comparable with Access with respect to SQL Server Integration.
3. Component debugging IN VFP
4. Smaller EXE's - There is alot of "air" in VFP EXE's now. They can be smaller.


Not an inclusive list by any stretch. However, they represent items that actually help you deliver applications. i.e., they are not tool centric.

< jvp >