Mike:

>I think you are missing the point.

I don't think so.

>I am simply observing that Ken's expectation that VFP is unlikely ever to have a stronger place in the IT world is ...

BEING REALISTIC ?

>If Microsoft is not interested in generating substantial revenues from VFP, it's hard to believe they will put any serious effort into supporting it, no less into further improving it.

But they are, aren't they. They are keeping the majority of VFP developers happy with a mature and incrementally improving product.

For example, VB to VB.Net is a quantum leap for most VB developers. They have gone from a version 6 product to a version 1 replacement product that just about shares the same name.

We went through the same hoop when VFP came into being. Unless VFP was radically changed, then it is old news to the rest of the IT world. The only way VFP is going to be marketed with the same gusto as say, .Net, is if it radically changes like VFP.net. If it does, then it wont be VFP any more and will likely alienate 500,000 existing happy VFP developers who will be just as apprehensive to use a radical, new, but eminently more marketable version of VFP as 2.6 developers were when faced with the prospect of upgrading to VFP3.