No paronoia, just a discussion.. "They" as you know is Microsoft - their advertising dollars, the access they allow to the development teams, what they plan on doing in the future etc. The choice of Code Mag was obviously to go that route. Nothing wrong with that - I'm just getting tired of people pretending they're one thing and actually being another..
>Claude,
>
>>No bet, but, really, isn't MS having an influence on the UT, Code Mag, Advisor DevCon, with what they'd prefer you to concentrate on? For example, how many Linux/VFP articles have been printed in Code? And it's not because the people developing in vfp aren't interested...
>
>The concept of THEY is very interesting in this discussion. What would THEY prefer us to concentrate on in CoDe Magazine? As far as I know, that kind of discussion has never happened between us and THEY.
>
>It's usually a case of CoDe Magazine setting our editorial direction based on where we think the market is going, what trends we see in the software development industry, what we find technologically interesting (we are all developers), the demographics and survey answers from our ever-expanding reader base... all focused primarily on Microsoft technology, industry standards, and good development practices.
>
>We have chosen not to focus broadly on ALL development technologies, but rather to be a Microsoft-focused publication. However, that does not mean that Microsoft's THEY are telling us what they would prefer us to concentrate on.
>
>I'm quite sure that the VFP team at MSFT would prefer to see more VFP coverage in CoDe, not less. I'm also sure that the C++ team at Microsoft would prefer to see more C++ coverage. However, there is NO THEY at Microsoft who are asking us to cover certain things. On the contrary, we have had to work very hard behind the scenes to build bridges inside Microsoft into the various product teams so that we could work out special projects that WE dreamed up, like the special FOCUS issues this year on VFP8, Office System, and Whidbey/Yukon.
>
>When we cover non-Microsoft products or technologies, it is in the context of how they work with the Microsoft platform or products. For example, we recently wrote about AppForge's MobileVB for Palm development, mentioning their upcoming .NET version, MySQL as a database alternative, and integrating Oracle Stored Procedures with .NET via XML. The fact that we have not yet covered LINUX does not preclude us from doing so in the future where it might make sense in our overall editorial direction.
>
>We believe there is much good material in CoDe to benefit VFP developers, including coverage of SQL Server in every issue, ASP.NET (surveys show that many VFP developers are using it already), generic articles on good development practices, industry commentary, and much more. THowever, VFP coverage in CoDe is not our primary focus, although we may still occasionally run an article with VFP code. Future special issues on VFP are more of a possibility. However, THEY are not telling us to do that. <s>
>
>I can't speak for UT or Advisor, but from our corner of the world, the paranoia is misplaced.