>> I hate to be an ingrate but I would like to see more done to promote this product!
>
>If you're going to bring this up again, why not add something to the discussion?
>
>Why do you think that the money is better spent on marketing a product that you have already bought into, and not making VFP a more solid, robust tool?
>
>What will marketing VFP accomplish? Do you really expect people to use VFP over .NET or Java? Isn't there a point on the curve where spending more money does not mean more results? Why would we push that point to the determent of VFP's feature set and service releases?
>
>Note, that I have nothing against you or anyone (including Microsoft) for wanting VFP promoted. But you did bring it up again, so I'm assuming that you can shed some light against the questions that we've already asked.

Hi Mike!

You should've also brought something new to the discussion.

The reason to promote VFP has already been discussed many times.

There are some many things that could be done to help the status of VFP but MS does'nt want to promote it. It's as simple as that. So we still have some years to support what we already have while starting to learn something else.

Here's another point of view. We should at least be thankful that MS is still working on making new versions of VFP. That way it gives us time to learn another tool while still making some money with our preferred tool.

With that lack of marketing VFP's days are counted. No doubt about it.

What about a prediction. Still 5 years to prepare ourselves to work with something else. After that we'll become dinosaurs like those old COBOL guys that did'nt want to learn anything else. But even the COBOL guys get more respect than VFP developers because there is a COBOL .Net and from have been written in past threads it looks very clear that there won't be a VFP .Net