Just setting the record straight, Gary. I gather that you agree with the conclusion.

>Mike:
>
>I know you are concerned but isn't it about time to change the record?
>
>>Ken,
>>
>>(SNIP)
>>>>> What is the overall plan to make VFP have a stronger place in the IT world. Because that's what is at stakes here. It's not just a matter of keeping the place occupied so far but to make it bigger. What do you do to make that happen?
>>>
>>>This is not likely to ever change significantly, but I do plan and hope to have more mentions about Toledo when it is released than was with VFP 7.0 since more planning and effort is going into Toledo, already started.
>>(SNIP)
>>
>>Your statement that VFP is unlikely ever to have a stronger place in the IT world is deeply disturbing, especially coming from the person who is ostensibly in charge of VFP marketing. This stands in stark contrast to your previous pronouncement that "the best is yet to come". Do you still maintain that there is any cause for optimism about the future of VFP?
>>
>>I appreciate your candor, and I do not question your sincerity, but consider the implications of what you have said. Shall we conclude that you intend to make an earnest effort to promote VFP, but you expect to fail? We know that VFP doesn't figure into the mainstream of Microsoft's .NET strategy, but is it also to be understood that Microsoft will never allow VFP to grow, i.e. to be marketed effectively? It is difficult to draw any other conclusion in the face of your most recent remarks.
>>
>>Mike