>>The purpose you assert is to raise the profile of VFP in a cost effective way. Cost effective yes, but will it raise the profile? No, it won't.
>
>That is entirely your opinion, yet you state it as fact?
>

Fine... IMO, it won't make a difference. Happy? You know perfectly well that any speculation on the future is by definition a guess and an opinion...

>
Well, as you've stated in the past, the VFP market is a mature one. Its not going to bring MS any great revenue
<

You have pretty much summed it up here.... Markets expand or contract. There is no third direction...

<<
and they are actively pushing .Net. Fine, but, they are still improving VFP for its developer base and given that we are well aware that VFP is not an MS "cash-cow", then why can't enthusiastic VFP developers do their own little bit to help raise the profile of the tool of their choice?
<<

They can do whatever they want. I just wouldn't expect too much. Personally, I think it is an EIF.

<<
VB developers didn't appear to get excited by their tool.
<<

Most popular dev langauge in the world with millions of customers. When you have the raw numbers like that, you don't need to rely on the soft stuff..

<<
VFP developers are generally excited by their tool. The difference IMHO is mostly the community - isn't this the very thing MS are trying to encourage right now - the evangelism of .Net products/languages and the development of communities behind them?
<<

No question the difference is the community. The fallacy on MS's part is that what happened with the Fox community can be replicated. There is some belief I think that the Fox community was created. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Fox community evolved from a core group that shared a common goal. The Fox community has always been small when compared to the rest of the world. To think there will be a .NET community is a mistake IMHO. What happened with the Fox cannot be replicated. The Fox Community was a pure entity without an ulterior motive. I see MS's view of developer communities as a way to homoginize the market place so as to make their marketing efforts easier. And for that reason, what you see with the Fox community will not be replicated IMO.

<
I suggest that a very strong lead was taken from the Foxpro community by MS who have observed in amazement since the outset, the enthusiasm of this community. I don't see how you can fail to understand this point or reject it? For my money, I don't care if MS fail to market VFP - my only
concern is that they keep improving it.
>

Fox will always be improved to the extent the product remains profitable and the improvements remain with the cost parameters of profitability. There will come a day when it will not be cost justifiable anymore. At that time, you will then have concern...


>
Then this the same for VB apps too. Irrespective of how people perceived VB, "did it make a difference" ? No, it didn't because MS just provided VB.Net - a language that is probably as accesible to VFP developers with their OOP background as it is to VB developers who have a little more familiarity with the syntax - beyond that, it is a quite different language to classic VB, and now, the job is learning the framework. For VFP developers, learning frameworks is almost second-nature given the number of VFP frameworks that exist in support of this product. I think you argument just fell over on this one.
>

What are you talking about? If anything, you just propped up my argument that VFP developers should invest the time to learn and embrace .NET now. And FWIW, there is still a hell of a lot of VB 6 work out there...