>>>So let's get back to VFP. Do you really think that there's something good on marketing it only to its community?
>>
>>Well, it's not bad. It'd be useless to avoid doing any marketing at all. So, that's a minimum. However, I would say that in general, a company usually markets of product of its own across its entire line of products. Otherwise, it's extremely difficult to attract new customers.
>
>I totally agree with you. I only hope that MS will get this.

It's mostly a recap of common conversations that keeps going on in this forum. Which is, by the same, also a common minimum thing to do for any company that wishes to increase its market for a specific product. We've seen some increase of potential in regards to that in various aspects at Microsoft in the last year. A little this of that here and there is at least good. But, in overall, I haven't seen any direct situation that would make VFP to be seen from the top.

For example, even if we have been given advantages as to know why VFP was dropped from VS, it still represents a good point to debate on for developers and other related people which uses VS and use this argument to tell their customers that VFP is dropping. So, yes, advantages is good such as being able to release VFP at any time without depending on a release date of VS and such but I'd say that in most situations, this is more a disavantages as it helps to have VS developers and customers to spread bad words against VFP.

Despite the fact that it'd be difficult to make VFP.NET, which is why it's not considered a .NET product, this is also another issue that contributes by the same. MS pushes .NET so hard that the entire world is focused to see only that. So, it's also another brick against VFP. I personally think anything is possible. For example, look at what Kevin has done by making a .NET framework of its product. Why couldn't it be done at the base level? Good question

Presently, VFP integrates extremely well with .NET. It does a lot of things and we practically don't have any direct use to use anything else - unless the client really wants to have .NET and wouldn't give us a contract otherwise. :) So, that's the start and it could be packaged as well from that product, I'd say and geared towart it as far as being recognized as a .NET product. By the same, we'd end up with the most powerful tool ever being recognized at MS as it includes a powerful OOP and database engine, among other powerful things. So, if it's too powerful, would it then become dangerous for the evolution of the .NET package at MS? Another good question