>>At some point in the past Fox Applications could also run on UNIX and Apple Mac's - was there some kind of subsidy from those OS vendors?
>
>Given that there has not been a unix version of Fox for almost 9 years - I would say that is irrelevant.
>
>But...even if it were not irrelevent - at that time - there was not royalty free distribution. In fact, you needed the distribution kit - which cost something like $300. So in fact - the notion of subsidies in pre-VFP days is in fact - irrelevant.

From Byte Magazine - back in May of 1994:
Separate add-on packages like the SQL Connectivity Kit and the Distribution Kit are now packaged together as FoxPro Professional for $695. The base package ($495) will sell for $99 through June 30.

So when FoxPro cost $695 and had advertising and probably a much larger team of developers the product was not subsidized or in your words "the notion of subsidies in pre-VFP days is in fact irrelevant" - but at $800 today and with no advertising and a smaller team, you think there is a subsidy from Windows?

Also from a version 2.0 Press Release at The History of FoxPro:
The Distribution Kit can create three forms of packaging for distributed applications: the traditional runtime, small EXE executables using a central library, or single monolithic EXE's. All three are completely royalty free; once developers buy the Distribution Kit they never need pay Fox any royalties or account for their sales in any way.

Was the press release lying or were they simply erroneous in their use of the term Royalty Free?

I could cite plenty of other references to the Distribution Kit being considered Royalty Free for example here is Tamar Granor's take on your theory:
Re: An argument in defense of MS and the .NET/VFP EULA's Thread #780795 Message #781049