MSFT Is better off hoping that developers will do just as we did: ignorantly bypass the EULA assuming it was the same as previous versions (and that is no defense as it was an ignorant thing I did). Then, they can make MORE $ later on when they audit you and determine that you are using their product illegally: they get fines and damages along with the licensing costs from you at that point, right?

Thank goodness for the original 'READER' of the EULA that posted the 1st question on this subject. While I would not be in violation of the EULA at work (Universal Subscription), I would be so at home. At home I have always purchased upgrade licenses and continued to use the previous version of VFP on my development machine. Not anymore...

What hurts the most is I feel like MSFT is getting pretty close to intentionally harming its development 'community' instead of outright harming the product. The community has always been the strongest point of the product even though the product is great. However, the end result could be the same.

tracy

>What has set me off here is the issue of the End User License Agreement (EULA) for VFP8. A lot of messages have already been posted on this issue; others have kindly posted relevant EULA sections for VFP7 and VFP8 which I reproduce here.
>
>In a nutshell, the VFP8 EULA explicitly states that, if you install it as an upgrade, you can no longer use the product that formed the basis for the upgrade:
>
>11.1 Upgrades. To use a version of the Software identified as an upgrade, you must first be licensed for the software identified by Microsoft as eligible for the upgrade. After upgrading, you may no longer use the software that formed the basis for your upgrade eligibility.
>
>The equivalent part of the VFP7 EULA does not seem to exclude the continued use of earlier versions, especially if the new version is considered a "supplement" to the old (bolding mine):
>
>UPGRADES. If the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is labeled as an upgrade, you must be properly licensed to use a product identified by Microsoft as being eligible for the upgrade in order to use the SOFTWARE PRODUCT. A SOFTWARE PRODUCT labeled as an upgrade replaces and/or supplements the product that formed the basis for your eligibility for the upgrade. You may use the resulting upgraded product only in accordance with the terms of this EULA. If the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is an upgrade of a component of a package of software programs that you licensed as a single product, the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may be used and transferred only as part of that single product package and may not be separated for use on more than one computer.
>
>This change means that if you need or want to continue to use the "upgrade basis" product (probably an earlier version of VFP) you need to purchase full version VFP8, or an MSDN subscription. This is considerably more expensive than the upgrade price will be.
>
>I currently have VFP5, 6, and 7 installed on my dev machine; I've bought every available PC platform upgrade since FoxBASE+. I was planning to buy the VFP8 upgrade and install it but continue to use 5, 6 and 7 to support existing apps at various clients. I would not have bothered to read the EULA so I wouldn't have been aware of the change, and that I would be in breach of the EULA by continuing to use VFP7.
>
>What I really object to, is that this is a surprise. It took an eagle-eyed early VFP8 adopter here on the UT to bring this to my attention. I believe MS should have notified the community of this change before it came out here on the UT. Users need to know in advance of actually purchasing product (and being able to read the EULA section(s) in question) so that they purchase the correct version.
>
>There have been other recent examples of Microsoft inserting overly broad or otherwise questionable terms and conditions in product EULAs. I want Microsoft to stop this practice and to be more up-front with its customers.