John,

>>
>I would also submit that your future effectiveness as a practicing lawyer will hinge greatly on your perceived ability or lack thereof in communicating. I would urge you to reconsider your position in this matter - for your own self interest if not for any other reason.
>>
>
>FWIW, this is not a appellate court court... When folks throw things out or evaluate things with a total disregard of objectivity, rationality, or reason, I pretty much have to move on....

True enough. It's the court of public opinion. That's why people are ignoring a lot of what you're posting and a disagreeing with a lot of your reasoning. Your posts contain much useful technical merit IMO (though I'm hardly an expert) but that's not what I see people responding to. They're responding to you on a personal basis, not because they're spoiling for a fight but because you're manner of communicating is a great irritant. What I am suggesting is that while it is certainly your right to post in this manner that this trait will eventually cause you GREAT PERSONAL GRIEF. It's entirely your choice but don't be surprised when your world starts to crumble.

What I'm asserting, based upon a few years of close, personal observations is that, candidly, your communications skills are in need of adjustment. They stink at times. You assert that you "pretty much have to move on" and what I'm saying is that when you assert this attitude, right, obligation or reason that you are essentially telling the other party(s) that their opinions (and them by association) are of no value by virtue of your saying so. IMO this will affect your future professional life and perhaps your personal one as well.

What I'm saying is that this personal trait is going to continue to cause you great grief. Your response is your own business - until you start interacting with another human being. Then it is the business of the individual you're interacting with, be it judge, jury, lawyer, business or personal colleague, or whatever.

Serious denial John.

Or you like the pain. <g>

And totally extraneous and unnecessary, which is the sad part.

>
>>
>Dealing with other people can be more than trying at times that's for sure. <s> But, in the process you don't want to become like that which you do not like. IOW, by "stiffening" your resolve with respect to your being unwilling to bend in your communication efforts with others, particularly if it is based upon your perception that they aren't listening, are unable to listen, uncaring, etc... you only become like them. Your determination to communicate how YOU think is the best way precludes you appearing to your listener/reader as someone who would rather hear themselves talk that actually make sure the recipient is hearing/understanding your message - which is the whole objective to begin with.
>>
>
>There are folks listening.. I know this from the many private emails I get... It is only the vocal few that try to provoke me that causes the problems...

That's all well and good but we're discussing public discussions and the ability or lack thereof to have them aren't we? We're NOT talking about some little scorecard where you tally the numbers for or against John. We're just talking about different ways for one to conduct one's self in a most effective manner in their public discourses.

You may well feel justified in your abrupt manner with those whom you may disagree but my assertion is that regardless of how you justify these mannerism that is irrelevant. It's how others view your mannerisms, not you. NO matter what your response to this point will change the fact that at some point in your future life you will at some point need the help of someone else. At that point you may well discover you're on your own as you have cut so many people off for so long in order to "just move on" that you're all alone, without anyone to help.

The issue is not how JVP interacts with JVP but how JVP interacts with others. I presume you are enamored with your relationship with yourself and your own opinions - apparently to the exclusion of others.

Thing is John, no matter where you go or what you do, as long as you carry these traits with you, there they are. You cannot escape yourself.

Be that as it may, you are, of course, able to exercise your free will to your own hurt. Or not.

>
>>
>Hmm.. Well.. With respect to VFP II'm not sure it means much either way - which is my point. You are indeed correct that once the license is sold the revenue stream stops but that's true of VB< C, C++, MASM and all other development languages I believe.
>>
>
>>The underlying assumption here is that Microoft must have a constant stream of revenues to sustain itself. In that we'd be in total agreement. MY euphimism for this is that they are "top feeders" and as such will naturally have less interest if products like VFP. I can live with that candidly as I think that VFP has an enduring place in the panoply of MSFT products. Will it ever rise to the level of VB or .NET? I doubt it. Can it be an effective and productive 'player' in the .NET sandbox? Sure. Can VFP today provide services and speeds .NET developers are still only dreaming about? Sure. Is .NET a great platform? From the looksof it it surely is!
>>
>>
>I guess I don't see the need for VFP to have to go away for .NET to flourish or visa versa. I see them as wonderful complimentary products - each with a stated purpose, ability and goal.
>>
>
>VFP will go away, not as a result of MS discontinuing it, but through a declining user base....

Who cares? .NET will go away some day too. I'm not sure about COBOL though> <g> I think it's here forever. <g>

>
>
>
>
>>I must admit to scratching my head a little at all the brouhaha.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>For goodness sakes, you'd think that in ten years of Microsoft ownership they would have had ample time and reason to kill the product had they actually been only interested in gutting it (like many said they would 1992) for the technologies like Rushmore. Microsoft's a lot smarter than that IMO. They saw a good deal when they got the developers as well as the product.
>>>>
>>>
>>>There is no question the community has kept the product alive. I have said before that Fox's legacy and influence is felt in a lot of places at MS. And given what is likely to occur with VB .NET, I think Fox still has some influence, just not the influence that some want.
>>
>>Not the community - Microsoft itself. Look, CA and A-T both effectively killed CLipper and dBASE, particularyl compared to Microsoft's moves with FoxPro. Did the community help? Sure, but with out the ongoing committment on MSFT's behalf to fund continued development....
>>
>>As far as the level of influsnece some folks want, well they're just plain unrealistic IMO. But, I think that sword cuts both ways, which is my general point.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>All you and I are doing is speculating....
>>><
>>>
>>>My only comment to this is No comment..< bg >..
>>
>>Oh please... <g>
>>
>>And, yes, I know soem 'behind-the-scenes' stuff too. So what? Nothing's of enough import other than to satify the gossips and social climbers, neither of which I am particularly impressed with. <s>