>My question is where were all these people 3 years ago when the MCP folks needed people to take the exam in order to justify a VFP 7.0 exam? Remember, the MCP stuff in the end - is JUST a revenue lineitem. If MS could have made a profit - you likely would have seen a 7.0 exam.

For some, maybe at that time they were still "mired" in VFP5 (or sooner) work and still gradually learning the VFP6 stuff. Now, maybe they feel they know VFP6 well enough, and in fact still producing VFP6 apps. True, taking the exam won't serve to help make them a better developer, but that never was the case anyway. Agreed, it would have had a little more value back then. But, in a small sense getting an MCP status has a similarity to getting an MBA - that is, having that on your resume or advertisement might serve to get your foot in the door when otherwise you would not have been given a second look. That's where the bulk of the benefit lies, isn't it? If passing the exam gets you just one new customer/job, it's paid for itself.

One thing I've noted throughout many of your posts (on a vast array of issues) - your assumption seems to be that most developers are (or should be) on the "bleeding edge" in their work. I don't agree with that assumption/assertion, and I don't think that's largely the case in actual fact. Sure, the gurus need to be there, as they are by definition the "leaders." But the rank and file remain maybe a version or so behind as they learn, in many cases from the aforementioned guru's articles and conference presentations. In my case, that's been largely the case for quite a number of years (ie, I develop, on average, about a version behind the current version).

Perhaps you remember from your MBA days in marketing class studying the new product development process. At various stages in a product life cycle the product has different types of buyers (Innovators, Early Adopters, Early Majority, Late Majority, Laggards). The point is, not everyone is an Innovator or Early Adopter like you, and a significant percentage of "buying" occurs after the Early Majority. This applies to VFP itself, its developers and their development skills, and even still the user base served by these developers.

It might be anecdotal, but I noted with interest in Jim Eddins recent post where he said a number of developers have yet to upgrade to VFP8 because much of their user base still run Windows 95. I know of several companies that fit that description. They will upgrade in due time - probably when most of us think what they upgrade to is still in the dark ages - yet that's where they typically are most of the time anyway. You're not going to sell these people a .Net solution anytime soon.

Same goes for your criticisms of FoxTalk & (more so) FoxPro Advisor. You will laugh at this, but sometimes I think they focus *too* much on new stuff. Think about someone new to Foxpro. They might not get near as much out of these mags if they didn't have some articles on older stuff mixed in. Clearly, you think an article is useless if it is a "rehash" of something covered a couple of times, but that's not necessarily the case. An article covering a topic already done may do so using a different approach and different sample code which may give a reader more depth of understanding, or finally make things come together when they did not before. I can tell you (since I say I develop a version behind) that some of these "rehashes" could not have come at a better time.

I could go on and on. While I'm on a roll here, I might as well confess I still use remote views when working with SQL Server data, and I'm not really into .Net that much yet. I'm gradually looking at using stored procedures and developing in .Net, in much the same manner I have with 'newer' stuff in the past. Once I get to actually using them, somehow I feel like there will be folks like you telling me I'm wasting my time for working with those "dying" technologies or techniques because of the next new thing. Yet all the while I'm making a living doing it.

My 2 cents on this and other issues. :-)