I have never used any of the FP products, I came to VFP at VFP 5. Maybe that's why I don't have the loyalty to VFP that some others have. Basically I don't see VFP as a religion :-), I will switch in a heartbit if I find something better :-).

>Following you logic we would still be in FP 1.0 for DOS no? FWIW, I think the have been some worthwhile enhancements to the language since then.
>
>Just kidding, but hoping that you only debug your own bugs is an illusion you should lose asap. In fact that is one of the reasons you should avoid your own bugs, so that you can determine, isolate and work around the bugs of the rest of world (hmm... interesting concept when we're talking about MS, don't you think?).
>
>My 2 Eurocents,
>
>Marc
>
>
>>Jim,
>>With all due respect to MSFT, I don't see any benefits to my customers if I get VFP 8 and recompile my apps from 6 to 8. There are some benefits for me (intellisense being one of them), as a developer. And as I read of some more bugs discovered in VFP 8, some new and some old, I will wait to see how MSFT/VFP developers will respond. If they have SP1 and fix bugs that I see critical for my app, then I know they care.
>>
>>I hear some voices (here on UT and at UG meetings) encouraging developers to buy VFP upgrade to make sure that MSFT has enough resources to continue work on VFP. I don't subsribe to this logic.
>>
>>>Hi Dmitry
>>>
>>>As you know, I agree that the bug you reference NOT yet being fixed (yet still showing VFP6 as the latest version where it applies in the KB article) is not a good thing at all.
>>>
>>>That said, you know that it remains a bug in VFP8 and your workaround code is already in place.
>>>Unless there are also other bugs that you've seen reported in VFP8 that you know present a danger to your applications' code, I'd think that moving to VFP8 has other merits.
>>>
>>>You already know about Intellisense. What about the few data "integrity" features added in VFP8... like detecting an incorrect record count (which causes loss of data) and prevention of tables going beyond 2GB (making them unopenable for action)????
>>>
>>>These are BOTH problems with VFP6 and VFP7 and to me add weight to moving up to VFP8.
>>>
>>>cheers (whatever you choose/do)
>>>
>>>>>>I knew there got to be a reason why I stay with VFP 6 <g>.
>>>>>
>>>>>You don't know what you're missing. :) Intellisense itself is well worth upgrading.
>>>>
>>>>I agree with you 100% about usefulness of intellisense. And I often load VFP 7 to lookup a syntax using intellisense. I just don't have the confidence that VFP 7/8 is more stable than VFP 6 and therefore still maintain my customers' applications in VFP 6. Actually I was about to jump into VFP 8 when I discovered that bug Q190496 was not fixed in 7 and 8. This bug broke a lot of my code, where I had to jump through hoops to get around it. And I was looking forward to removing my "work-arounds" after upgrading to VFP 8 when I was really surprised that the bug is still there.