>Agreed. Developer licenses cannot be identical to end-user licenses for a myriad of reasons. Also, since I don't plan on 'mass-producing' apps in both VFP7 and VFP8 to the public, I'm not going to worry about it!

Maybe we're a little more sensitive about this here in Canada, because there is considerable anti-piracy activity in the media here. Not so much as out-and-out campaigns, but as tacked on 'notices' all over the place.
So we can just picture some 'audit' suddenly sprung and an 'easy' finding of non-compliance. And neither ignorance of the law nor assinineness of a contract hold up well in court.

And I must relate that I had one document that was very differently rendered in Word97 versus Word 2000, so I can say that "end-user" products are not immune either (I simply kept the document (80+ pages) in Word97 after spending half a day trying to "fix" it in Word 2000.


>
>Tracy
>
>>I agree with you here. The lawyers who wrote the EULA don't understand the needs of the developers. I'm guessing that the "you can't use" statement is going to be standard on lots of MS software going forward. I can see it with Word or Excel, but it just doesn't make sense for developer's tools.
>>
>>
>>>I have VFP8 from the Universal MSDN membership. I am testing our VFP7 apps in VFP8 daily. I have already run into a few 'gotchas' that I had to change immediately using VFP7 to open the forms and make the changes because the forms would not even open in development mode in VFP8. I plan on continuing to use VFP7 only until I can release a version in VFP8 safely. Once that is accomplished, I no longer plan on using VFP7 to develop apps. Now if I purchased an upgrade license for VFP8 I would expect to be able to do the same. I have to agree that the EULA 'reads' that what i am doing would be illegal, but I do not think that is the intent and it would be a major turnaround for VFP licensing. You cannot stop completely using the previous version unless the newer version supports EVERYTHING verbatim that the previous version did and that is not the case. So the EULA makes no sense because developers could potentially find their existing VFP7 apps 'dead in the water' and forever
>>stuck
>>> in VFP7 if they cannot open them up in VFP7 to modify them to work in the newer VFP8 version legally. Hopefully I was clear on this. In summary, I do not think MSFT would intentionally create this type of problem for its developers so I choose to believe (stupid of me probably) that it is okay.
>>>
>>>Tracy
>>>