7 was still in beta... Keep in mind that a launch and the product being released are two different things. Indeed, 7 may have been "launched" in 5/2001..but....it was not RTM'd until late summer.

A launch is just a marketing thing.

Again, my point was that there is precedent for MS discussiong future versions - when the next version is still in beta....

Ultimately, not a big deal (don't know why some are making it out to be that way...) I simply commented on Ken's post...


>Hi John,
>
>According to http://www.levelextreme.com/Conferences/DevConnections/OrlandoMay2001/ , VFP7 was officially "launched" at VS Connections during May 2001. There were also a couple of VFP8 planning sessions, which seemed to be the first mention of VFP8. This would be consistent with Ken's claim that future versions were not publicly discussed before the launch of the currently planned version.
>
>>>Hey John,
>>>
>>>>Also, if memory serves, VFP 8 was quickly announced - and committed to when 7 was still in beta. If I am wrong on this, I am sure somebody will point it out.
>>>
>>>Rather than making someone else prove you wrong, why don't you do the leg work to find the proof to support your statement? Then we can all see if your memory is actually serving you well or if it's faulty.
>>
>>
>>Yes, you are right... I should have done that... ;)
>>
>>OK....let's start with
>>
>>Thread ID: 507187
>>Message ID: 507211
>>
>>This was from Craig Berntson, which was posted in May/2001. In the post, he recounts a meeting the Fox Team had with attendees - in which VFP 8 was discussed. NOTE - VFP 7 did not get released until the fall of 2001.
>>
>>Dave - I know for a FACT - that 8 was WIDELY discussed before 7 saw the light of day. At the time, I was a bit surprised because it did break with protocol a bit. Then again, 7 was in the works for a LONG time. My guess was the feature list for 7 was cut off - and the new features were slated for 8. I also recall that Ken had made several postings to dispell rumors that an 8 would not be released if the 7 upgrade numbers were less than satisfactory. Again, some of these discussions occurred before or right at the time 7 RTM'd.
>>
>>In the end....there is precedent for people at MS to comment on versions - beyond the version that is in beta. Ken's statement to the contrary is - shall we say - not entirely accurate. I'll leave it at that..