> > My point here is that MS owes us more than a slammed door. > > This is the crux of the matter. You see an obligation > where none actually exists.
I think that depends on how you look at how MS handled the whole VFP-affair. The way I see it, they lured people into investing in their language product KNOWING they weren't going to market the product, thus removing the usefulness of the very product they were selling as a useful tool. That's underhanded at least, illegal at most. Put it this way: if you would have known about MS's designs for VFP in the beginning, would you or anyone else have bought into it then? > I don't think that there's a person on this list who > wouldn't have loved to see Microsoft promote VFP in a manner that it deserved. But > the rest of us have accepted the reality that this is a dead end. Fortunately we've got some number of years, maybe even a decade, before 'showtime'. A whole lot can happen between now and then. Bill > -- Ed Leafe _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
