Jen,

If one can be antagonized by JUSTIFIED criticism, then I don't really feel that I want them having too much to do with what I depend a lot on anyway!

In other words, if JUSTIFIED criticism will 'turn someone (important) at MS off', then they ought to get out of the business.

On the other side of the coin, if I have to worry about its reception when I offer JUSTIFIED criticism, then the listener is not the person who I actually need to be doing the listening.

JUSTIFIED criticism should ALWAYS be welcomed - how else does one learn about one's "problems" if not from being told about them?
Today there is over-much worry about HOW something is said rather than WHAT is said. It is called "Politically Correct". The sooner we dump that concept the sooner we will all be better off!

Cheers,
Jim N

>>Dear Barbara,
>>
>>Tu quoque? :)
>>
>>Of course understanding the client's business is important, but that does not mean that the tools you use, and your level of knowledge of them, to implement the solution is irrelevant.
>>
>>How can you estimate how much time it takes to get a job done if you do not know your language/dbms thouroughly? How can you make sure that your implementation is ok at delivery time if you do not know what the problems are of the underlying packages that you use?
>>
>>Analysts are (were?) thought to think indepently of the tools that will be used to develop a system, but first this theoretical, in practice, you always somehow have the tools in mind when you design solutions, and second, once you start the implementation, even this theory does not support the irrelevancy of tools.
>>
>>As a client of software developers, I'd rather have someone with whom I can talk and who I think will understand my business, than someone who is an expert in some language, but we are at the other side of the decision, we have to make sure that what we promess, we can deliver within time and budget and at the quality level required, and for that we need a thorough knowledge of our tools.
>>
>>And that is why this thread is very important to all of us because our level of expertise in VFP is the investement that we have to try to recuperate. And that is also why we should at least be watchful of what MS has in mind with VFP, not take everything at face value and continue discussing the topic.
>>
>>Kind regards,
>>
>>Marc
>
>You're right, of course. We need to be able to present a strong front to M$ so that we can get our concerns heard by them. They might listen to a 300+ group from UT in a way that they will not listen to us as individuals. But even so we have to be careful not to inadvertently antagonize them with our (justified) criticism.
>
>Jen