Good points, Jim. The next argument from them will be that they can't possibly put everything in the official documentation. This is probably true, but, my point is this information(COM interop w/.NET) is important enough to be there. Many times more important than FOXISAPI which gets docs and examples in spite of the fact that it's no longer being advanced...

>Agreed Claude. (good thing I previewed. it almost came out "Greed Claude")
>
>MS in general and VFP in particualr relies far far too much on external sources for information. This, at least in the case of VFP often even includes documentation clarifications (i.e. "working as designed" with added explanation) rather than putting it (afterwards) in the documentation too.
>
>This is fine for people who get their jollies by searching high-and-wide for things, but it does absolutely NO GOOD AT ALL for anyone who relies primarily on the product DOCUMENTATION for their important information.
>
>And remember, it is generally acknowledged that some 10% or less of the community even uses the internet for VFP support issues, so the argument that white papers and such are good enough doesn't really wash!
>
>cheers
>
>>David,
>>Let's not dance around this subject. Key technologies should be in the docs, period. No product survives relying on digging up and finding key technologies described in obscure whitepapers on 3rd party web sites that most developers don't even know about. It has to be from the source, namely the product itself.
>>BTW, could you do me a favor and list the VFP/.NET interop articles from CODE magazine that you mentioned and, more importantly, your current magazine since it focuses on VFP...
>>>Claude,
>>>
>>>>...This is why I wish they would just make VFP Open Source so the community could contribute the solutions that are needed...
>>>
>>>I understand the desire for open source, but in the point you are making about needing better docs about COM Interop -- the community does contribute solutions that are needed.
>>>
>>>CoDe has previously run COM Interop material and, of course, there's the whitepaper on Rick's site and a shorter article from Rick in Advisor (linked from the VFP home page).
>>>
>>>I'm just curious... do you think there is some other information needed related to COM Interop with VFP other than what's included in the whitepaper on Rick's site? Would you be happy if that exact same information were "in the docs" or posted on MSDN and not just on Rick's site?
>>>
>>>Help me here... what is missing other than removing Rick's name from the whitepaper?
>>>
>>>Can you list some specific aspects of COM Interop (either direction) that have not been sufficiently covered through readily-available resources? Up to this point, I have not committed FoxTalk 2.0 to running .NET-related material, but I am regularly assessing the interests of our readers to see how many people would be interested in something like that.
>>>
>>>I do understand that your beef with MS is perhaps broader than this, but I'm interested in your answers related to available info on COM Interop with VFP.