John,

>You example was very generic. When Ken said that the future of VFP depends more on upgrades (VFP 7 or MSDN) than anything else, I take that as being something that is not open to a lot of interpretation. The only future for Fox that matter is 8. If 8 is not realized, the future of Fox is neccesarily a moot point.

I doubt Ken did sugest that the sales of VFP7 would be a parameter for VFP 8 specificly. For me, the future of VFP lies somewhere behind VFP8. Of course, this is my interpretation.

>Had Ken been more generic, open ended, I would agree with your analysis. Because it was provided with a good degree of specicifity, I have to reject the comparison as not applying. Still, I respect your opinion here and we will agree to disagree.

>At the very least, my interpreation is a reasonable one; not one that was pulled out of thin air, as some would like to claim it was. As long as you see and understand that, my point is made...

It makes me wonder, if you regard a glass half full or half empty when you drunk one half out of a full glass beer.

Personally I think we as VFP community get too paranoid about this whole subject.

Walter,