>If I'd want to develop in VFP for Windows and Linux I'd have to buy two copies of VFP. One for Windows development and the other for Linux.
>
>Do I understand correctly?
>
>Is it what MS really means?

That's not the way I read it - the way I see it:

- If you want to develop an app by running VFP on Linux, you need to have a VFP license. I don't know what the position is if you already have a VFP license installed on Windows; if you use both simultaneously you'd clearly need an extra license for the Linux machine; if you never do so (e.g. dual-boot) maybe not. IANAL.

- The important point is what happens when you develop your app, create an .EXE and a setup program containing the runtimes. Now you want to distribute this to your clients. If they run it on Windows, fine. If they run it on Linux, MS's current position seems to be that you have to provide them with a full VFP license for each Linux machine on which your runtime executable will be installed. Providing just the runtime is explicitly against the EULA. Since VFP is a lot more expensive than Windows this doesn't make a lot of sense economically. Some are arguing this represents "tied" selling.