>>I only said that VFP 8 is neccessarily part of VFP's future. Any statement about VFP's future must include 8. Certainly, VFP's future may very well encompass more than 8. Still, 8 lies on the critical path.
>
>I'm not disagreeing that 8 is apart of the VFP's future.
>
>Ken said: The Fox team is and will be measured by the number of developers who upgrade to VFP 7.0 or MSDN subscriptions, that is what determines the future of VFP more than anything else.
>
>You said: Put another way, not enough people are upgrading to warrant making VFP 8 a slam-dunk that it will release.
>
>They do not mean the same thing, and you're trying to make them. Stop spreading FUD.

Very well, how's this?: Since the future of VFP depends on people upgrading to VFP 7 and/or MSDN, if not enough people upgrade, VFP's future is in doubt.

Perhaps I construed future too narrowly. Usually, I get slammed for construing things too broadly. Whichever version you choose, in the long-run, it basically means the same thing.

Bottom line, folks should upgrade. Ken has been up here telling people how important it is to upgrade. I have echoed that sentiment. That has been my point all along. I merely provided a suggestion to entice people that are waiting to upgrade - for whatever reason.

No FUD here...

< JVP >