On Nov 28, 2007, at 9:37 AM, Bill Arnold wrote:
> 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.
How did they "lure" anyone? By not promoting it? By marketing it
only to those who were already using it?
If they had promoted the hell out of VFP and touted it as the tool
for the next 20 years of development, you might have a point. But the
lack of promotion has been a sore point ever since they took it over.
You can't have it both ways: if they didn't promote it, you can't
accuse them of "luring" anyone into using it!
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
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.
