> ...and this does relate to my previous point, many times, however, we can overcome what we see as short-comings in the product from our own POV with some clever coding that builds a tool that can address these. One of the reasons we can do this is that the product allows us, and has allowed us in the past, to do so.

George --

In general, I don't see anything in my message that, if developed properly, would cause a problem with backward compatibility. Even the report as an object. HTML has gone through the same evolution -- static representation to a dynamic, interactive document model -- without a hiccup.

But, we're addressing the strategy of upgrading VFP rather than tactics, so let me shift gears.

In general, I agree with what you say. I think all of us active Fox developers have benefited greatly from UT, and have enhanced our toolset with favorite solutions to familiar problems.

But, we all have to balance building the toolset with building solutions. Many times we, or the community, are not able to develop the pieces that we would expect in the product and that our development would benefit from. And the lack of some tools, that one would expect to come in the package, is a serious barrier to adoption by new users.

If SQL Server came with the View Designer -- people would mock it and justly so.


What I'd like MS to do is acknowledge that VFP is a mature product. Let's make it mature! Bring in the best of breed of 3rd party solutions, plug in the holes, fix the bugs.

If everyone else is having problems on the 'cutting edge', perhaps those who want a robust and powerful database development environment will find a mature product attractive. That to me is important -- giving the product a name, a purpose, modifying the product along those lines, and marketing the h*ll out of it.

I think if MS relegates VFP to only current developers and current developers
needs, it has, in effect, killed the product. I think we as a community are so concerned about our own livelihood and our own needs, that we neglect the world outside us. We're like a church that has declining membership and we keep asking "why don't people join our fellowship?"

There are many applications which work well with VFP out of the box, or, using an n-tier approach, ready themselves for deployment in other than a fat client situation. And, we need to think beyond the borders of the US. The international use we see of VFP suggests that it is a viable product worldwide. That may be a market that can be addressed also by MS.

At this time, we all wonder what the future holds -- well, I guess that's been the case for some time now, huh? Some thoughts -- all in the hope of vitality for VFP and for the community %)

Jay