John,

OK, you can not prove your statement, period. Now will you please stop requiring proves from everyone else whenever you disagree with them?

By the way, I repeat that I did NOT write my last messages with any bias whatsoever regarding VFP and it future/importance. My message was solely meant to make it clear that whenever someone discusses/argues, they should do so with equal rules. And with equal respect both ways, although I may not be a perfect example of that myself. :-)


>Tore,
>
>Do we really need to demand direct evidence that 99% of the I/T world regards Fox as a legacy/obselete tool? In their gut, I think most people know this to be the case.Whether they like it or not, that is hardly the issue.
>
>My only point is that "Fox-Knobs" bite back in a personal way when whine and complain about the current state of affairs. Like Rod said, these people must be the type that like abuse...
>
>
>
>
>>Hi Kohn,
>>
>>I am not arguing for/against VFP here, that's irrelevant in this case. I just want to make it clear that whenever you require that other people prove their points, we also must expect that you prove your points. You don't seriously mean that you 'play by other rules', do you?
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>I also dare you to prove this phrase: "the fact that the other 99% of the development world (including MS itself) has tossed FoxPro onto the pile of irrelevant/obselete technology."
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>You dare me to prove.....
>>>
>>>Tore, it is self-evident. Whether you want to see that or not - that is your issue to deal with.