>John,
>
>>I'm a trained observer. I watch what people say, and what they do, with more emphasis on the "what they do" than the other. After watching all this back and forth on whether or not VFP should be in the box or out of the box, and seeing how the "players" in this arena are leaning, I've come to a conclusion. VFP is out of the box. Robert Green as much as said so in his postings here on the UT. So, let's get that out in the open and move forward.
>
>I think you're probably reading that right. I don't have any inside information, but it seems way obvious that the decision is already made.
>
>>I think the telling tale will be how much marketing is done on a standalone VFP.
>
>That's my only worry about taking it out of the box. If MS puts a very visible positive spin on that move and emphasizes VFP's usefulness in various situations (other than support for "legacy" applications), it just MIGHT be seen as a positive move.
>
>However, if there is a vaccuum of publicity, and if the MS representatives worldwide are NOT given clear "talking points" about how to explain the removal, the obvious conclusion most people will reach is that it's removed because VFP is dead.


My point exactly. I don't really have a problem with it coming out of the box because I'm going to use it anyway it ships. If I had my "druthers", I'd leave it in the box and let is ship early too. I'm thinking they'll use Devcon to beat the drum for VFP and hopefully with Robert heading the unit (he's one of us), MS will allow him to market the product the way it should be. As they say, "the future lies ahead."