Mike,

I know what the feeling is.

In short they do the talking but do something different (referring to the video of Mr. Balmer and the latest one).

>>Michael,
>>
>>>I think you are missing the point. VFP is a great product, I've never disputed that.
>>
>>Your recent criticisms of VFP7 might lead people to believe otherwise...
>>
>>>...I am simply observing that Ken's expectation that VFP is unlikely ever to have a stronger place in the IT world is the closest thing I've heard yet to an admission that Microsoft will never allow it to be marketed effectively....
>>
>>One more time... VFP is intended to continue as a money-maker for Microsoft, but the main market for it is VFP developers and perhaps a few others who discover the product along the way. Microsoft, IMO, is not interested in making VFP a "preferred" technology for big business, because that's the role of SQL Server and .NET.
>>
>>It is unrealistic to think that pouring millions and millions more dollars into marketing it will turn around the perceptions that are already there in the IT world, especially when Microsoft's standard approach to big business almost always involves SQL Server. That's where the big money is for them.
>>
>>However, increasing the marketing budget by a more reasonable amount to coincide with the launch of VFP.Next and marketing VFP as a great product for working with SQL Server and with .NET makes a lot of sense to me, and I would not be surprised at all to see that happen.
>>
>>There will be news coverage of VFP8 when it arrives and there will be news coverage of the VFP Toolkit for .NET in the months ahead (in fact, thousands of non-VFP people have already seen startling new things about VFP on the VFP portion of gotdotnet.com in the last few weeks, and many are getting a new view of VFP from the info posted there).
>>
>>Ken's comment about not expecting things to change drastically in VFP's penetration of big business IT departments (which is the context I think he was referring to) is really a refreshing dose of reality. Many would prefer to pretend that somehow a major turnaround will happen and VFP will become the preferred tool for most of big business. (That would be the goal of a huge new advertising campaign, wouldn't it?) Ken is simply saying, "Don't expect that." I appreciate the refreshing openness.
>>
>>However, I do not in any way think that this means that Ken is not doing his job correctly or that he is not interested in expanding VFP's horizons. He is, to a degree, where is it feasible and affordable marketing-wise, and has done much already to change perceptions inside Microsoft and outside. Just don't expect TOO much, like a massive sea-change turn of events.
>>
>>>... If Microsoft is not interested in generating substantial revenues from VFP,...
>>
>>You are assuming something here that is not true. I believe Microsoft IS interested in generating substantial revenues from VFP. That's why Ken is constantly saying, "The best thing you can do to help market VFP is ask your friends to upgrade to VFP7." That's why they are continually adding new features to the product.
>>
>>He is also saying that the next launch will be a bigger splash with more extensive marketing. Just don't expect too much, such as outspending anticipated revenues on advertising.
>>
>>>... it's hard to believe they will put any serious effort into supporting it, no less into further improving it.
>>
>>The eternal pessimist, once again. They ARE putting serious effort into supporting VFP. The VFP team is alive and well, as are the many other people in product support and documentation areas. They ARE further improving it, whether you can believe it or not.
>>
>>From conversations I have had recently with Ken, I sense an excitement about the new features that are being added into VFP.Next, that go beyond minor window dressing features shown so far. (He did not tell me what the major changes and additions are, as those are closely guarded secrets, but I can assure you that the genuine excitement about the next version and about VFP's future were plain to see.)
>>
>>I am very happy with VFP7 and it serves many development tasks for me very well. I will be among the first in line to get VFP8 when it is released, so I can put it to use right away. If and when we reach the end of the line, I will still be productive with the tool as long as it is technically feasible, but my skills as a software analyst, architect and developer will carry me through, no matter the language.
>>
>>I guess I just prefer to be positive about it and support the people who are keeping our favorite tool alive and kicking. That seems to me like a better way to show others that VFP is a great tool with a great community and team supporting it.
>
>David,
>
>Characterizing my views as "negative" and yours as "positive" is neither fair nor constructive, and it certainly does not address the point. You assert that Microsoft is interested in generating substantial revenues from VFP, and paint a rosy picture about how the next release, to occur at some indefinite future date, will have many more wonderful features, the details of which, of course, we cannot discuss, and will be marketed in some don't-expect-too-much but more effective new way to an as-yet-unspecified not-too-strategic market. Let's suppose for the moment that every single one of those vague points were cleared up. Is anyone expected to buy this?
>
>There's just one little problem: when a proposition is disproved, there's really no point in detailed further analysis. We needn't waste anyone's time with a lengthy debate about how all of these improvements will be achieved, because Ken, in his refreshing honesty has confirmed that Microsoft will not allow VFP to succeed. That is the point.
>
>Call me a pessimist if you like, but this is the logical conclusion when the marketing manager for a product tells us not to expect that it will ever have a greater share of its market. If that isn't a pessimistic statement, I don't know what is. I find this disturbing and I'm simply, for the record, stating that I'm highly displeased, not with Ken's behavior, but with Microsoft's.
>
>Why shouldn't those who make a living off of VFP be seriously upset by the damage the Microsoft is doing to the VFP job market? What developer in his right mind would be indifferent to the prospect of ever-diminished support, less frequent fixes, and weaker enhancements. There is no legitimate purpose served by Microsoft's mistreatment of the FoxPro community. That is a fiction, so I hope we might reason this out to everyone's benefit.
>
>When I see a blatant contradiction in logic, I object, but in this case we are harmed, so I object strenuously. Am I panicked by all of this? No, I certainly intend to make the best of the situation, and to continue working with VFP as long as humanly possible. I chose this language because it's the best programming tool I've ever found. I don't expect any dramatic changes to happen overnight, but at least I would hope to occasionally exert some tiny bit of influence in a favorable direction.
>
>Mike