>>When it comes to the focus on development tools at MS, it is dotNET, period. To think that any serious effort is going on that targets VFP outside the current user base is simply not seeing reality.
>
>The focus is .NET, yes, but that doesn't make your second sentence here true.
>


Unless you can show me where the serious efforts are that promote VFP in a signifcant fashion to the outside world, the second sentence is true.


>
Unless you can show otherwise, the simple fact that there is a Fox team at Microsoft indicates that there are efforts being made to sell the product.
>

There are efforts to improve and support the product. These efforts are targeted at the current customer base, not to people that do not use the product. Given the choice, MS would like to see new customers and new projects adopt dotNET.


>Check out www.GotDotNet.com and look under "Get to Know .NET" and you'll see "Visual FoxPro with .NET". If MS was not serious about selling this product I doubt that would develop a vesion 8.0 or promote it on their Web sites.
>

I am familar with the site. I do have a contribution up there..< bg >..


>>There is only 1 credible development tool message from Microsoft, and that is dotNET.
>
>Credible? What do you define as credible? For some one that likes to toot their own horn about the serious applications that they've written with VFP, I'm surprised you think that all the work you've done with the product is simply a joke.
>

Credible as defined by the outside world. The fact is, folks that do not use Fox do not use fox or scoff at it do not perceive it to be a credible tool. It is not a view shared by me. IMO, if it gets the job done, the tool has credibility. However, as you know, most IT decisions are rather superficial.


>
And point number 2: .NET is a platform; VFP and VS are both products. Your analogies break down before they start.
>

When I say dotNET, I mean to imply VS .NET. I will be sure to clarify this in the future.


>>Even if Ken could have his own way, do you think he has a budget to counter act that???
>
>This must be the bogus logic that produces your bogus conclusions. You think that it requires an equal counter reaction to .NET to prove VFP's worth? Has it crossed your mind that MS would like to sell two solutions, one more vocally than other, but still be serious about both?
>


In the end, it falls under MSDN anyway.... So you see, if you have already, MS has already achieved its real goal, to make developers MSDN customers. Tools and technologies may change, but MSDN will be a constant. And fwiw, the real platform that counts is Windows...


>The fact that you don't see VFP using the same budget as .NET does not logically mean that there is no interest at MS to make money on the prodct.
>
>>Actually, as a shareholder, it is not in your interest to invest as much a $1 on VFP marketing. Whether you spend 1 or a million dollars, it won't make a difference to increasing shareholder value. If anything, it will decrease shareholder value.
>
>What? Unless you have facts and figures to prove this, you're just guessing or lieing.
<

I am just expressing an opinon...