>>
>Hehehe you make it look like everybody can do whatever they want with MS. It did'nt look that way when their was an investigation by the U.S.A. government about monopoly abuse charges.

>
>Are you trying to draw a corollary between what MS can/cannot do and US Antitrust law as codified by the Sherman Antitrust Act? If so - I would like to hear you articulate that...

Don't over-analyse what I said. It just meant that usually when a company is under an investigation of that type it means that not only can they take care of themselves but they also know how to take care of others <g>

>The fact is Denis - what MS does or does not do with VFP has nothing to do with Antitrust Law. There is nothing anti-competitive in MS's actions here.

I never said or implied that. I also think that it's the case. I'd have no problem with lack of marketing for VFP if MS already said that VFP8 was the last version and that they did'nt supported it anymore. But VFP is still a product under development and still owned by MS. So I simply don't get whay they are so ashamed of VFP.

I can't wait for the day when MS mentions on their site in which situations it's better to use VFP instead of .Net

>I'll leave it at that...

I would'nt bet all I have on that statement <vbg>.

>
>>
>I'm surprised a lot by your reply. Isn't this the first time you replied to defend MS anti-vfp strategy? ROFL
>>
>
>This is where the pathetic view point comes in. I don't see the anti-VFP strategy here from MS....

What can I say here. We definitely don't agree and we'll never do.