John,

Go directly to the point. VFP started dying. Painful to accept but because VFP is not .Net and it will not be in the future, it will surely die. Just like the VFP for MAC, no more version after 3.0 because the no. of users diminished significantly. Same thing will happen with VFP, making it not a .Net tool for whatever reason, the no. of users will diminished in the years to come, and in fact our company will stop developing with VFP late this year or early next year. With a handful of VFP users, then BPOV, MS have the justification not to release another version...

>Tracy..
>
>As bitter and painful as it is, this is where I see the VFP marketing effort falling short. I think we all agree that the marketing effort is directed at the community, getting the community enthused about the product and from a financial standpoint, getting the community to upgrade to the latest version.
>
>I submit that there needs to be a fundamental shift in the marketing focus. On one hand, VFP, like any other product, needs to maintain certain levels in order to command a staff and existance. On the other hand, the most valuable asset in the VFP world is the community, not the product itself. If MS is concentrating on product revenues as far as VFP is concerned, I contend that this is a mistake since the end game at some point in the future is .NET. This June will mark the 10th. anniversary of the Fox aquisition. In that time, MS has made a lot of $'s on Fox directly and indirectly. Lets keep in mind that the best Fox minds were put to work in other areas of MS.
>
>If revenues are not the concern, what should be? IMO, the community (customer base) should be the concern. A happy and satisfied customer base is what it is all about. Giving the VFP developer a path to upgrade their skill sets to become .NET developers is the most important thing MS can do right now. Should Toledo become a reality? Part of me says yes and part of me says no. I lean toward yes because there are those that will continue to use VFP for quite some time to come. At the same time, there are people that will either want to or have to move. This puts the Fox team in a tough spot. The ultimate question is this:
>
>"Can we serve both the Fox developer who wishes to stay and the Fox developer who wishes to leave?"
>
>IMO, both can be served. To the Fox developer who wishes to stay and continue to use Fox for the foreseeable future, they should be allowed to do so. Just like the VB 6 developer who is being afforded the opportunity to use VB 6 with the benefit of support for the next few years. Like the VB developer - the VFP developer should have the benefit of knowing that "this is it..." There is something to be said for finality. No longer will you have the lingering question of "is there going to be another version of Fox???" These lingering questions IMO do more to hold the community back than anything else.
>
>At the same time, by taking the stance that .NET IS the future - the VFP developer should be afforded the benefit of a migration path - both in terms of code and skill set. There are a lot of free materials in MSDN today - and for the most part - a VFP developer can use them. Still, there are some tailored things the benefit could make use of.
>
>There is no question that the extreme loyalists - 10-20% of the customer base will be pissed off. To them I say - "Good luck...". The important part to focus on is the other 80-90% of the people that will both get and are ready to receive the message. It is simple math - I will be happy to sacrafice 1 or 2 to save 8 or 9.
>
>Of course, the 1 or 2 we have now constitute a fairly loud minority. Too often, their reasoning is riddled with more emotion than logic. My goal is nothing short of counteracting this loud minority message with an alternative view predicated on reasoned and rational thought...
>
>Regards,