>Why do you have a problem with someone educating others? Don't you think that someone in a trainers position such as Duffy, can pass some valuable information to others based on their vantage point?

I think your missing the point. You can educate others *without* slagging the product off. I dont think Jim Nelson is arguing that VFP is a better database than SQL server or is frightened of learning new technology. Its just reminds you of a vulture circling around its meal. "Dont you know SQL server is the only database you should be using with VFP? Come to my Award Winning SQL classes, Buy My SQL Dataclass Product, Buy My SQLAudit Product" ...... "what, you want VFP training? Sure VFP is a great product, come to my Award Winning VFP training classes". OK, perhaps I am sending this up a little too much here, but I think the point is made, dont you?

>You have Jim Duffy telling you his class enrollment is down. You have Rick Strahl telling you sales of Web Connection aren't what they used to be.

There are only so many VFP developers, its a mature product. VFP has evolved but not radically. There was a great need for training when Foxpro 2.x developers were making the OOP leap. That was eight years ago now. There isn't the training demand because most VFP developers are long term and know the product now. There aren't too many new VFP developers using the product. That doesn't mean the product is dying. New developers can get help and assistance from boards like this and many other on the internet that just weren't there when VFP first arrived on the scene. There just isn't the need for VFP training like there was. As for Rick's product, there are so many other competing VFP web frameworks nowadays :- AFP v3.00, FoxWeb, ActiveVFP and ASP/ASP.net. When WWWC first came out, there just wasn't as much competition and vanilla ASP was immature and slow. It is hardly surprising that WWWC isn't selling like it used to because most people who want it have got it. That says nothing about the decline of VFP except that it has "maxed out". So, what is *your* point? You can interpret "facts" however you want to.

>It seems to me, these people are only stating the obvious. But they get slammed for it.

Rick Strahl, Markus Egger, Doug Hennig, Jim Booth, Marcia Akins, Andy Kramek, Steven Black and others manage to mentor the whole VFP community, knowing full well that VFP is a mature product. They don't bash the product or see the VFP community in a "predatory" way. They are both positive and yet realistic about VFP. Duffy's message is double-edged and I think Jim just sees right through it. Duffy could just say that SQL server is a much better way to handle data with VFP. Most people would accept that, no arguments. Its just that when you deliver such a message, it is not really necessary to take a potshot at the state of VFP at the same time, on a pro-VFP board, with an opportunistic skit about former VFP MVPs who are now C# MVPs - Duffy implies that because of this "defection", it proves VFP has "had it" - that's just utter rubbish. Most people who hang in this place are VFP "fans" and it just gets them going when other people start to knock a very good and solid product with lots of life left in it for the sake of their own commercial agenda.