>DD,
>>
>>I think you're moving in the correct direction.
>>
>>Let me ask you a question, also springing from a recent ..erhh.. "active" thread <g>. The one about the CDX size changes.
>>
>>You don't suppose that the changes to the building of the leaf nodes in the CDX was purely by chance, do you? No, of course you don't. Then why? Well, ostensibly to make the CDXs more stable, which in and of itself isn't a bad deal. Yet... If you're going to nudge this little lady into the harsh spotlight of co-existence with SQL then shouldn't you clean out the proverbial closets first?
>>
>>These things don't happen in a vacuumn, now do they.. < eg >
>
>No they certainly don't. Just to add one more "log to the fire", if I wanted to assure VFP's future, if I wanted to assure growth (and sales), if I wanted to put to rest all of the negativity, then I certainly would go in the direction I've indicated.
>
>Now again, and I'm going to mention this in every post on this thread, I don't know anything more than anyone outside the Fox team about this. It's pure, unadulterated guesswork on my part.

George;

I have mention for several years FoxPro has been a step child as a development tool in the Microsoft arsenal. Implementing ActiveX controls as an example has not been easy to do in all cases. We have helped each other to find work arounds to many problems and have been most successful. The FoxPro team has helped with SP's and new releases bring the product closer to the abilities of other Microsoft development tools, while still allowing "The Fox to be The Fox"! It is integration we want – not Visual Basic! :)

We all hope that FoxPro will be better integrated into the total Microsoft family of applications, development tools and data based products. Indeed that would be the best indication that FoxPro will be around for a while!

Tom

P.S. I like your "guesswork"!