Doug,

>The attitude of marketing, where there is the mentality of "If I sell ten copies, I can spend X amount for marketing, and "if I sell 20, there is a little more." is laughable. Thqat is not the approach for the operating systems, or automobiles, or most anything else.

I must differ with your analysis. I suspect that MOST businesses set their advertising budgets according to their current income and do NOT spend more than a certain percentage of revenue on advertising, unless they are in start-up mode with no revenue or taking a risk on launching a new product.

I think that IS the approach for operating systems, automobiles and most everything else.

While I would love to see Microsoft pushing VFP in a big way to corporate America, I don't think we will ever see that, because they are pushing .NET and SQL Server as the strategic development platforms, for very obvious financial reasons (SQL Server seats).

Here's an interesting idea that is more in line with Microsoft's strategic focus: How about Microsoft promoting VFP as a great front-end to SQL Server and spending tons of money advertising that fact? How many of the VFP faithful would like that approach? How many would still castigate the VFP marketing people for promoting SQL Server over "pure" Fox?

All this whining back and forth at Ken will not change the facts of how Microsoft calculates ad budgets for existing products, and is mostly a waste of time and energy. I would prefer to see Ken spending time on more fruitful tasks than having to answer all of these attacks.

(Zipping up asbestos suit now...)