>I find myself today exporting an Access 2000 table to VFP, and after being forced to choose "DBase V" as the target format, I though:
>
>How little is VFP considered in the other MS products.
>
>I know that you're personally commited to make this change, and just wanted to comment that this kind of presence could lead to a greater mindshare for VFP. I don't remember seeing VFP mentioned as a possible data source or format beyond the ODBC manager.
>
>In the meantime, just want to congratulate for the amazing job you're already doing for the amount of changes we perceived lately (msdn pages & mag, ads, even VFP mentions and considerations in non-VFP seminars, et al).

The (ISAM) "native driver" support for FPW and VFP (beyond 3.0) was dropped some time ago.

The ISAM drivers would never have been able to handle DBC's, only free tables; that's why the move to only ODBC drivers for VFP.

Anything else (supporting both ISAM drivers and new ODBC drivers) would have been a duplication of effort with limited functionality in the ISAM area.

The architecture of VFP "data" has progressed beyond the point of simple only (eg. dBase V).