Bill Anderson wrote:

(melodramatic) -- Man, is that the pot calling the kettle black???

JVP:

Well...you would have to provide details on this. Brutal honesty and realism

perhaps - but melodramatic???? No...

Bill Anderson Wrote:

No, I was implying that a .NET

dominated keynote at a Visual FoxPro conference (50 minutes out of a 75

minute keynote) was bad for the Fox community. You can argue all you

want, but the audience didn't like it...

JVP:

I guess my response is - "What did the attendees expect?" Anyone with a clue

knows that if MS is giving a keynote - it will have a decidedly .NET flair.

FWIW, I don't see why a keynote like this should put a damper on things -

unless of course people wish to ignore the truth. The fact is, the meat and

potatos of a conference lies in the breakout sessions - not the keynote.

Look at the bright side - MS is continuing to support the product - and from

what I understand - more of .NET will have a VFP flair. The good news - as

I understand it - is that people INSIDE MS are looking at VFP. This is

where YAG - I think - is having major influence.

VFP has not nor will it ever be the strategic focus of MS. Game - set -

match - it is over. The next best thing you can hope for is that VS .NET

gets the productivity features that makes VFP a good tool. At the same time

however, we don't want the baggage that VFP brings to the table that makes

it in some respects - far inferior to .NET...

Oddly enough, people like me are looking at the glass as being half full

while people like you are looking at the glass as being half empty. Pretty

ironic I would say....

Bill Anderson said:

MSFT blew it, and they knew it. There isn't much more to say -- your

conclusions are not relevant.

JVP:

Well...my conclusions are relevant. Whether you want to recognize them or

not - that is your choice. As for whether MS feels they "blew it" - I highly

suspect whether that is really true. In public, the mantra is to evanglize

.NET - period. Again, the meat of the conference is in the sessions. And

FWIW, in the last few years - at least 25% and at times a greater % of Fox

conferences have been devoted to non-fox technologies.

As the person who gave what is arbuably the first devcon sessions on Fox

consuming data using non-fox technology - I again would say my conclusions

are highly relevant. And, while I was not there, I did get briefed on the

show by people inside and outside of MS...

Bill Anderson said:

Showing .NET content is relevant. Dominating with .NET at a VFP

conference is not.

JVP:

This conclusion on your part is without merit. If you look at the session

breakdown by technology - the conference was dominated by pure Fox sessions

- sql server, office, and iis - all of which have become essential to a fox

conference. You really cannot count the precons - as they are optional.

Nonethess, there were sql server and Fox precons as well.

The conference was not "dominated" by .NET. If you are attributing this to

the keynote - you are placing WAY too much emphasis on the importance of the

keynote...

Bill Anderson Said:

It's neither positive nor negative, it just is (their message). Like I

said, MSFT knew they blew it.

JVP:

My guess is if MS had to do it again, they would play it the same way....

You may think they knew they blew it - but given that it was in line with

the overal MS strategy and given that there was a nice balance of sessions -

I disagree with your conclusion...