>> Yes. I've seen your article long ago. My apology Ken but the person who stated re: lack of resources, belongs to the roster of MVPs. As far as VFP is concerned relative to VS.Net, I want to see it compile with CLR but with the option to create unmanage code just like C++. But somebody said (an MVP) I forgot his name, "it will not happen given VFP's lack of resources." <<

I'm glad you said that because it's really, really important to distinguish between statements by Microsoft and comments from the peanut gallery. Microsoft is cautious in the extreme when making public statements about its products, because it knows they will be taken as policy and statements of direction. Despite rampant speculation (including my own), Microsoft has NEVER made any public statements about FoxPro saying they intend to stop developing it. And we need to keep that in mind unless and until they do.

Please understand clearly what I am saying and what I am not. I am not waving the FoxPro flag or criticizing those like you who choose to move from VFP to other products. You are trying to make a living at this and do what you think is best for your business. No problem with that at all. What I do have a problem with is misinformation. Neither Ken nor anyone else at Microsoft has said the reason VFP is not in .NET is because of a lack of resources. Although I don't necessarily agree with that decision, especially from a marketing / mindshare perspective, I accept the explanation that the reason was VFP would lose so much in conforming to the .NET architecture that it would be a greatly diminished product.

People can speculate all they like; it's human nature. Let's just keep it factual.

Mike