>I see a commitment to the community. This is where I see the marketing efforts directed. When it comes to products, the story is .NET - period. To those companies that currently do not use VFP, do not think for one moment that MS is going to market VFP to those companies. There is one development tool that will be marketed - and that tool is VS .NET and the .NET framework.
>
>If Ken erased doubts as far as your company's use of the product - good for you. But to extrapolate to something more - outside of the VFP community, I think that goes too far.

I don't believe that I "extrapolated", however, I submit that MS's renewed "commitment to the community" matters. If VFP developers feel more confident about their product, they are more likely to use it for the next project. I don't have any delusions that VFP will receive as much attention as .Net or that the number of VFP developers will grow by leaps and bounds, but having a company stand up and say "we are committed to this product and its future" makes a difference. I expect developers will have differing requirements in this regard, but my intent was to show that the new efforts were producing results, at least in my case.

Also, I don't like to compare Ken to Robert. As I see it, Microsoft made a decision to devote more resources to VFP.

>Make the decisions that are best for your company. I would submit however that if you are making decsions based on marketing, you are making decisions for the wrong reasons.

Of course. Many factors weigh in decisions like these. Microsoft's display of commitment to VFP is one of those factors. Wouldn't you agree that MS's commitment to .Net is a factor in your decision to accept it, or is it based purely on technical merits?

>In any case, my last name is spelled Petersen - so in the future, if you could spell my name correctly..< g >

My apologies.