http://my.advisor.com/Articles.nsf/aid/GRANT39
> So way back in 1996 the uncertainty of VFP's future was being >discussed by one of the most respected Fox folk around. Do you really >think that you would have a chance in hell in any courtroom of >convincing a judge or jury that you had no reasonable warning that >VFP might not be supported past 2014 back then???? This isn't a simple question of legitimate business practices involving risk and winners and losers, but whether or not there was a secret plan by MS to buy out the best of the breed x-base product and then systematically squish it in the marketplace, leaving no viable competition for this genre of products, and thereby swing the development population into the company's other development tools. If that was the strategy, then the whole VFP-affair was deceitful to everyone concerned, and people were hurt by it. That, it seems to be, is a basis for legitimate complaint. On the flip side, consider that MS could satisfy at least my concerns just by making the source code available to a 3rd party such as Christof who is involved in building a path out of the woods for the folks that MS has hurt and abandoned. Under the circumstances, does MS "owe" us at least that much? I say the answer is clearly 'YES'. 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.
