>I expressed a concern at that time that removing VFP support from MDAC adds to the overall impression that VFP is poorly supported by Microsoft. Let's say you have a VB programmer who wants to use the OLE-DB driver to get to VFP data -- first, it isn't in the standard MDAC like everything else, then he finds it is not downloadable. This reinforces the idea that VFP is not supported.

How exactly does "the database is not free" turn into "the database is not supported"?

>Let's say I am dealing with an ISP who does not usually provide support for FoxPro tables. I say that I want them to install the VFP OLE-DB driver (this is on a shared server where they routinely provide Access drivers). OK, the ISP says, where can I get it? I say, sorry, but the only way you can get it is to run my custom installer that I have built -- or buy a copy of VFP7. I'm going to have an uphill battle in this situation.

I think your over exagerating here. If you own VFP, you can deploy the provider to the ISP pretty easily.

>Multiply this thousands of times by people who work in some other language or application (Excel, Word), who have no need or desire to buy a copy of VFP7 just to get access to the drivers.
>IMO, very few people who cannot get the OLE-DB driver for free will buy a copy of VFP7 to get it.
>One of the best ways to get good excitement going about VFP is to make the driver freely available.

It would also be pretty exiciting if they decided SQL Server should be completely free as well. That doesn't mean they're going to do it. Keep in mind that what you're really suggesting here is that MS should release a database product that is free to use and competes directly with the SQL Server cash cow. Hardly realistic. But thats just me.