John,
I think the sig line is just sort of a symptom of a bigger issue. Isn't it sort of a "conflict of interest", not technically, but de facto? It's to Microsoft's and Ken's advantage if they sell everyone here a copy of the latest vfp in addition to VS.net and maybe a couple of other things too. Whereas I think the main purpose of this forum is to stretch vfp as far as it will go. vfp has multithreading, and great web capabilities now, but, do you hear Ken talking about that anymore - no, he'd like you to believe you need VS.NEt to do any of this.
I don't think he shouldn't be allowed to do his marketing thing here, but, I think we should bring it up when it seems like that's what he's doing. Of course, this is just my opinion...
>Jim,
>
>I agree that beating a dead horse is not productive. That said, it is a perfectly valid point to have the conversation that focuses on how VFP works with or is affected by new technologies such as Longhorn, et al. It adds absolutely nothing to the conversation to focus on irrelevant items such as what Ken includes, or in this case omits, from his sig line.
>
>< JVP >
>
>
>
>>SNIP
>>>
>>>Time to move on....
>>
>>Good advice.
>>Can you PLEASE do so as regards anything that relates to VFP's future?
>>We've really heard it all before and it is tiresome by now.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>>
>>>< JVP >
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Hi Mike. I am the product manager for Visual FoxPro.
>>>>
>>>>I see. One would think that one way of creating a relationship between a product manager and the product community would be actually advertising in your signature that you are in fact the product manager for that product.