>>>Yes, what JVP is saying is:
>>>
>>>When a customer buys a copy of Windows for say $200 to run on their PC, the price would normally only be $175, but it has been inflated by $25 in order to subsidize the possibility that in the future they might be running a VFP application on it.
>>>
>>>Seems to me that MS should just bump up the price of Windows if we start running VFP apps on Linux. No ?
>>
>>>>>Well what do you know? JVP's opinions are still as predictable as night following day: specious and contrived (he will make a great lawyer).
>>>>
>>>>John's comments sounded very resonable to me. I think he's right, frankly.
>>
>>Gerry, I am in complete agreement with you. Interesting to see that David Stevenson has not yet responded to Tamar (about the charge for the early distribution kit not actually being a 'royalty'). JVP was not straight on the facts and had greater error in his opinions (IMO). And yet D.S. found his commentary "very reasonable".
>
>Houston;
>
>I paid $500 for my Distribution Kit and $199 for the upgrade. We will have to wait to see how this turns out. Perhaps Microsoft will not give us an answer preferring to let us sweat about what there decision will be.
>
>How long can it take a team of attorneys to make a decision about running VFP on Linux? I should not ask such a question. They get paid by the hour! :)
>
>Tom

Remember, Tom, it's not about the team of attorneys making a decision. That was probably done long ago. Now they have to couch it in terms that only they can understand so that when they tell us, it won't be anything we can hold them to if things turn out badly.

What is the old saying - If it weren't for lawyers, we wouldn't need lawyers?

Alan