Michael,

>snip<


>
>Doug,
>
>Whether or not VFP "continues" is not a binary choice, it's a matter of degree. There's a quality of life issue here. Your suggestion that the continuation of a commercial product is independent of marketing is unconventional and unpersuasive, to say the least.

*shrug*

Then I guess you're stuck.


>
>It puzzles me that you should ask Allan what he is going to do, as if you failed to realize how much he has already done. When Allan speaks, it warms the cockles of my heart. I can't tell you how great it is to hear those kinds of sincere affirmations coming from many others as well. The people who have taken the trouble of speaking out like Allan have done ten times as much as anyone had any reason to expect of them.

Well, I never presumed that Allan hadn't done anything. Why are you presuming I thought that? As a matter of fact I have several times expressly asserted that I'm perfectly comfortable with the notion that both you are taking your approach and he taking his approach. IOW, I have no argment that you are taking the road you are. Why do you seem to have trouble giving me the same courtesy?

You have missed this point I presume? Or, must folks agree with your pov to have value? Either way I see people attempting to move the product forward. IOW, I see both approaches as having value.

>
>You, on the other hand, have done less than nothing by advocating a "call to inaction". You profess to be logical, and yet you produce nothing but a series of tired fallacies.

I have never asserted that folks should do nothing. As far as your assertion that what I am asserting are "tired fallacies" about all I can do in response is wonder out loud why you seem to find it so easy to run someone down that you've never met? If you do take the time to reread my posts I think you'll find that I've never been against anyone taking the particular course of action they deem as being the best - though I do reserve my right to question their efficacy. I've even suggested that I have no trouble with your letter writing campaign though I don't think it's the best approach.

Call that a 'tired fallacy' if you choose but from my point that is what is called a reasonable approach - based on historical facts.

>
>This isn't a battle between those who believe FoxPro is dying and those who don't. The question isn't whether the future is preordained, or that we should presume to know it. The question is simply whether we would consider asking Microsoft, openly, to do a better job of marketing VFP. Could we ask less of you? Does it make sense to ask anything less of Microsoft? Is this too much to ask?

As I've said befiore, I have no problem with you taking that approach. Why does the fact that I think there are alternative approaches seem to cause you to be so defensive about yours? If you think that's the best approach, go for it. I do seem to recall that you've had a habit of belittling those in public who have demurred from jumping on your particular bandwagon and that at one point you actually apologized in public for being (in my words) too pushy. Is this another case of you wanting others to see the world as you do and being intolerant of those who do not?

Again - You take the path you decide is best for you and have the courtesy of accepting that I might wish to take another please.

>
>Let's dispense with the "Microsoft knows what we want" argument once and for all. Yes, they know, but do they care enough to do anything about it.

Then why expend any energy since you've apparently given up before you've started? You must think that your approach will have an effect in spite of this assertion, correct? If not, then you're just plain crazy as you have two diametrically opposed notions co-existing. <g>

> That's the issue. At some point, you've really got to wonder how they can resist, and it all comes down to numbers. The way I see it, there are a lot of FoxPro programmers who believe strongly enough in this to say so. Maybe I'm wrong, but there's not much harm in giving it a try. Yes, we'll continue striving to be excellent in everything we do, but the rest of us will also do this one thing more.

Well, after some 9 years of working with the folks at Microsoft I dare say that they do eventually 'get it'. That it may take a while doesn't strike me as being all that unusual. I can surely tell you this; of all the companies I've watched who at various times have owned the xBase products (dBase, Clipper, FoxBase, Arago, etc) Microsoft has been the most responsive to the community. Maybe you haven't notined this as a result of not having the histoprical perspective I've been able to gain over the years?

What I faind facinating here is that this seems to ba all about you. I'm sorry but I can't seem to get past the notion that you're somehow offended that I have no desire to validate your approach. I most sincerely apologize if I have this wrong but for goodness sakes at least give others the right to think independently of your approach...

>

>Does the risk of losing our "competitive advantage" by speaking out justify remaining silent? It's doubtful that we could, by any deliberate action, do more damage to VFP than Microsoft has already done by its inaction. And please, let's not go back to the irrelevant topic of "monies spent", because the most important things in this case, like their own newsletters, are free. This is not a question of marketing dollars, but of marketing will.

Well, who's remaining silent? As I have asserted before I happen to be of the mindset that my work speaks louder than my words. That's really all.

>
>We're not wasting bandwidth by obliterating flawed arguments that serve only to discourage people from taking constructive action. The only action to be taken is persuasion. No one is required or expected to act out of nobility, because what we seek is in our mutual interest, and that makes perfect sense to me. If you have to ask "Why bother?", why spend so much time telling us why you choose not to bother?
>
>Mike

The problem here Mike is that you are not nor am I the sole arbiter of what the definition of "constructive action" is.

Again, I cannot state this more clearly than I already have - If you choose to generate a letter-writing campaign great! Why do you seem to have gas over the fact that I choose to let my work speak for itself?