>>In this scenario, it is not that important whether VFP or .NET are a nice products, but their ability to tie people to MS Windows, Office and SQL. And in this field, VFP is a killer. MS can use VFP to sell more SQL licences than we think. I think this is one of the reasons the VFP team should not improve the VFP native database engine too much, or at least in it's limits. The 2GB limit should never be raised, native encryption and security should never be implemented, ... This way developers will be pushed to use MS SQL.
>>
>
>Hola Javier,
>
>I couldn't agree more with you re vfp/sql. As a matter of fact, I firmly believe that the only way MS will even consider devoting more resources to vfp is if it was stripped completely of the ability to interact natively with .dbf files.
>
>Regardless of how many thousands of users enjoy the benefit of apps developed with vfp, MS sees only a fraction of a percentile point in terms of revenue, whereas vb and other applications that use sql server as a back-end represent, for the most part 100% profit (excluding msde, mysql and other server platforms).
>
>

Totally agree. One remark: even if VFP would not sell MS SQL (which it does), it ties to Windows, wich is not a minor benefit for MS. If the program that runs your business only runs under Windows, then you have no choice.
Small businesses don't usually have a lot of technical demands. They use spreadsheets, word processors, email and browsers. For that matter you can use Linux with OpenOffice, and a variety of Internet tools; but what are your choices if your order, invoicing and inventory system is written in VFP? You have to buy Windows. As for Office you can still go for OpenOffice, but you are stick to Windows. I think that's a real benefit for MS.