This is all good stuff you've written Charles. Thanks. However, my statement was a sarcastic stab at Ken's list of negative hallucinations -- I paraphrase them: "this thread hasn't said move from VFP", "Microsoft has never said move from VFP", "I've never said move from VFP."

Now, unless you think that a UT thread, MS, and/or Ken mean more than the reality of the VFP job market (your independant success excluded, good for you!) or that almost no universities teach VFP, it is fair to suggest one may be myopic & cloistered in thinking there no problem in VFP-land. I don't believe for a moment that you'd advise your kid, if entering college/programming, to make sure a pure over all that VFP material.

I'm the "the 58 Club" and VFP has already had it's day in the sun. And actually it was called "FPD 2.6." I'll always remember it fondly -- like my girlfriend in highschool. Call it "getting savvy" or "bleeding edge", it still will ultimately mean "move from VFP."

>Not sure if it is MS that is cloistered or myopic. Their goal is to maximize profits for shareholders and and have a strategic vision of where they want to take *their* company. They've made the decision that VFP is a nice product, deserving of resources commensurate with the revenue it generates. And that is working out, as far as delivering new versions, etc, but it is not part of their strategic plan to evangelize for VFP.
>
>That being said, as Fox fans, we can make out own decisions about our business model. "Employment" may not be the way to go for highly skllled fox developers. I do know that self-employed consultants who use foxpro's great strengths to solve business problems for clients who do not dictate tools are making a potload of money and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
>
>Both Steve Black and Rod - both of whom I respect highly - make perfectly valid points : Rod says it is a very good idea to get savvy with .Net. Of course he's right. Steve says: don't rush to start programming .NET for a living - you don't need to be on the bleeding edge of this one - and of course he's right too.
>
>There is plenty of money to be made right now with VFP and down the road when there are good developer tools and training for .NET - by people who've actually used it to write, deploy and version apps - as Steve points out - a good OOP oriented VFP developer who has been learning .NET at his own pace - will be able to add .NET to his tools and deliver even more powerful apps - having the ace-in-the-hole of VFP.
>
>Is knowing VFP the best way to get a *job* - of course not. Hasn't been for quite a while. Can you make very good living with VFP as your primary tool - you betcha.
>
>I say this as one who saw VFP 3.0 as a beta,not to actually be used for delivering apps, and used it to learn OOP. I never shipped a VFP app until VFP 6.0 was out and VFE 6.0 was in beta and clinets never complained.
>
>I think tryihng to control MS is a fool's errand. Realizing where they are coming from and adjusting out own business model accordingly is just good survival skills.
>
>As I've often said, I've make a *lot* more money off Microsoft than Microsoft has ever made off me. < s >
>
>
>> Very good observations -- in their own totally myopic & cloistered little way. Meanwhile, out here off "campus" (i.e. the job market), there are numerous reminders that VFP developers had better move to *something*...assuming, of course, that we like employment. Perhaps Tom Bellmer's concerns are best understood in this context and need not be refuted...assuming, of course, that Tom likes employment, too? Tom?
>>
>>Steven-