>Tom,
>
>I did notice your brevity, but you have since made up for it < gd&r >.
>
>I do think a disclaimer was in order...what does fully Windows 2000 compliant mean? VFP6 came out a couple of years before W2K, so I suppose it (VFP) had a Windows logo and an NT logo on the box. So, the question is, is W2K Windows compliant? If so, then I guess VFP is W2K compliant.
>
>Denise, I'm making these statements tongue in cheek...many folks here have made W2K their preferred development platform for VFP, myself included.

Me too! Denise, I hope we did not scare you. Sometimes we get a little light headed. I think it is the keyboard which can have a strange effect upon some of us. Windows 2000 and VFP 6.0 work very well together. Honest! Now is it CodeBook compliant? That is another story. :)

Tom
>
>>>Tom,
>>>
>>>Whew! I was wondering who would belly up to the bar and attempt to make that certification...
>>>
>>>>>Client just wants confirmation that Foxpro 6.0 is fully Windows 2000 compliant. Is it? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>Yes
>>
>>Steve;
>>
>>Notice my brevity. Not even a period, exclamation or question mark was added! That allows an open-ended conclusion. Should I state there is very fine print available at a location I cannot disclose that disclaims any responsibility for problems due to software, hardware, applications, developers, system and network administrators and season of the year?
>>
>>By the way our corporation will not be using Windows XP, as it has been determined that 80 % of our applications will not run on that operating system. That is a nice round number! It certainly is a good thing we only use Microsoft development tools! Otherwise that number might be greater!
>>
>>Somehow I am very happy with Windows 2000 and will do my .NET development using it.
>>
>>Tom