>I can see two reasons: cost and personal preference. Upgrading isn't cheap and some people resent being pushed into spending more money when what they use works fine for them. And some people simply like what they are using more than the upgrade. There's tons of people staying on Windows Media Player 6.4 because they can't stand version 7. I'm still using Office 97 even though we have 2000 available because I like it better.
>
>A lot of people are tired of being pushed to upgrade all the time. But I do agree with the last part. If you choose to stick with what you have, you really can't complain when the latest and greatest doesn't work with it. It's just a fact of life that choosing to upgrade one thing often forces you to upgrade other things, too. So you either stay with everything you've been using or upgrade everything you need to get the one you want.
>
Michelle,

What's an upgrade to Win98SE, $80.00? Seems reasonable. I'm perfectly fine with the argument regarding price and personal preference. However, given the system requirements, if you want to upgrade to VFP 7.0, then you should also be willing to upgrade the OS so that you're working in a supported environment.

What I don't buy is the notion that you're being "pushed" into upgrading the OS. Win95 is 6 years old. It's life cycle is done. You can't expect a company to support older versions of software indefinetely. It makes no sense from any business perspective since it becomes cost prohibitive. If you're unwilling to upgrade the OS, then some question must exist as to the real need to upgrade to VFP 7.0 in the first place.

Personally, I'm sick to death of dealing with Win95. If I had my choice, everyone here would be running Win2K Pro. While that will happen in the future, right now it means that I've got to check to see of DCOM95 is installed, check to see if the WSH is installed, etc. It's a PITA.