That is what feeds the anger, and it's hurting all of us, MS as well.

>I didn't say VFP is dead, but I do think there's a serious problem here. Who's the one here who isn't facing reality, Craig? You still seem to be in the denial stage. If I'm being too much of an alarmist, what harm is there in simply asking MS to do us one little favor, for their sake as well as ours?
>
>Mike


One could start by applying some aloe to the 1000 cuts.

1. Add updated (to conform with OS upgrades) VFP drivers back to MDAC!! If MS can support dbase, and text. then they should support their own VFP product.

2. Make training available. Quit restricting VFP training to MS owned Unervisities in the orient. Make CBT training available in the US. Private trainors cannot do this profiably because after allowing for a shakedown cruise, then writing a training cirricula, advertising and distributing the same,the product cycle advances making the investment into a loss.

A huge restriction to my rant about the above is the MS re-invention to the .NET strategy. Not every database user has his applications on the WWW. Not every computer network is exposed to the WWW. There is in existence huge networks, that are totally remote from the so-called internet, and thus will not benefit from .NET technology or the MS idea of metering its software. Not all developers are Webmasters (although some combine the two disciplines.) The idea of executing an application remotely (according to the license purchased) and accessing data even more remotely, and returning it to still another, is, in my mind a grandoise scheme that may or may not fly, no matter the billions that MS may put into it. Even if is does, the medium is more suitable to the entertainment or news business, and not for minor or major mainstream corporate applications. That is itself relegates the technology to a niche.

3. Restrict advertising in ADVISOR and similar publications to announcments only, and spend some marketing effort to promote the product as a rapid application tool for ntier applications. Point out that with VFP you can see the code as opposed to Designer2000. It does have advantages, and they need to be promoted by the vendor, not the developer.

4. Encourage publication of books, including "how tos" to facilitate new developers interested in coming on board.

Personally I think it is good that VFP was withdrawn from Visual Studio. That move may just preserve it a little longer.