VFP 9 Will Head for Where?

On Tue, 11 Feb 2003 20:54:44 +0800, "Allen" <WebMaster@IBM.COM.CN>
wrote:

>VFP 9 Will Head for(or Go To) Where?
>
>1. Is VFP.NET, or Not.
>2. Is Ture Compile, or Not.
>3. Open Source Code, or Not.
>

My best guess is "not" on all three. For my thoughts about VFP and
..NET, you can read the article on my web site at
www.tomorrowssolutionsllc.com\vfpdotnet.htm

I'm sure VFP 9 won't be open source. Microsoft shows no signs of using
open source for any of its products.

Tamar

The difference in price between open source and closed source software isn't
all that much for professional products.

$79.95USD For SuSE Linux Pro
$91.30 USD for WinXP HOme

"Tom Gahagan" <tgahagan@charter.net> wrote in message
news:3e4f0364@tnews.web.dev-archive.com...
> > I'm sure VFP 9 won't be open source. Microsoft shows no signs of using
> > open source for any of its products.
> >
> > Tamar
>
> Perhaps the first signs of that are now showing up. Gates is said to have
> told a recent gathering that open source will continue to eat into their
> profits and they can expect to have to lower software prices if they are
> going to be able to keep up. Perhaps an indicator of a small leak? < g >
>
> Tom G.
>
>

Hi, William Sanders (Ni Hao):

How To Protect ?
Use ReFox ?
Can Not, ReFox Was Not Well.

Ask : Why Use P-Code For FoxPro ?

Sorry For My Poor And Bad English.

- Tuberose

"William Sanders" <wsanders009.bob@ev1.net> д?
:3e517790$1@tnews.web.dev-archive.com...
> Allen - there are still ways to protect your source code and p-code - have
> you tried some things yet?
> xie xie {Bill}
> "Allen" <WebMaster@IBM.COM.CN> wrote in message
> news:3e48ee8a@tnews.web.dev-archive.com...

From your article:

<<

Let the world know you're using VFP. Build public perception one user at a
time. You can do this by including the phrase "Powered by Microsoft Visual
FoxPro" somewhere that your users will see it, such as in your application's
splash screen. If people run into enough applications "powered by Microsoft
Visual FoxPro," they'll begin to wonder what it is. Make sure to include the
name "Microsoft" in there; one of the issues is that people (including some
Microsoft employees) don't realize VFP is a Microsoft product.

<<

Why do you think this will work? Other than the technologically curious, who
really cares what an app is written in? And, if an app is away from the
public eye - as most apps are - how would this approach be effective.

Also, don't kid yourself that MS employees don't know that VFP is a
Microsoft Product - they do know. The fact is, they don't wish to
acknowledge it.

If you think these suggestions of yours could work, you live in a fantasy
land.

< JVP >

<Tamar E. Granor> wrote in message
news:jqrn4voqcuoeollfkp4ou98784m8mhpft4@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2003 20:54:44 +0800, "Allen" <WebMaster@IBM.COM.CN>
> wrote:
>
> >VFP 9 Will Head for(or Go To) Where?
> >
> >1. Is VFP.NET, or Not.
> >2. Is Ture Compile, or Not.
> >3. Open Source Code, or Not.
> >
>
> My best guess is "not" on all three. For my thoughts about VFP and
> .NET, you can read the article on my web site at
> www.tomorrowssolutionsllc.com\vfpdotnet.htm
>
> I'm sure VFP 9 won't be open source. Microsoft shows no signs of using
> open source for any of its products.
>
> Tamar

Heya Ms. G - don't feed the troll - it's never done any good... mondo
regards [Bill]

Sorry Evan.. .for the delay in answering. I've been neck deep with a ASP
project and I've not been doing much fox browsing of late so I've not been
by here .

I'm just now getting familiar with this movement as I've made the decision
to not have all my eggs in one basket. It seems to me that there is just as
much "hype" about this movement as there is about MS but I'm still new so
that judgement might be unfair. It is good however, IMO, to have someone
niipping at your heals. Keeps you honest and working to be better. If open
source can do that... then more power to them!

Personally... I wish a really great database product would come along and
challenge VFP. I know that it is not likely as VFP is so far ahead of
everything else but I think that if there were some actual REAL compitition
that VFP would actually be shown just how good it really is.

Best
Tom G.

> As it said, it's aimed at "one user at a time." There are all kinds of
> things we're aware of without really knowing about them because we get
> little messages here and there. The "Powered by Microsoft Visual
> FoxPro" is meant to be one of those little messages.

Curious...has any of this actually achieved the first user? I agree that it
is certainly a "little message". My question is why do you think it will be
effective? A serious question on my part because I have heard this grass
roots argument trotted out but never supported.

If you recall, MS itself would not sanction a "Powered by Microsoft Visual
FoxPro" logo. Given that, why do you still think this "one user at a time"
think is anything more than a pipe dream?

I understand it is the "popular" thing to say. However, for anybody with a
reasonable degree of understanding of how the market works to perputate this
theory as a workable one is unreasonable.

> I've heard enough stories over the years about Microsoft employees not
> knowing that I have to believe there's some truth in it. Whether it's
> still true today, I can't say.
>

Like I said, don't kid yourself into thinking that folks at MS don't know
that VFP is a MS product. That is no longer a convienent excuse...

< JVP >

> I know that when I'm shopping for something or even just browsing, the
> familiar gets a boost unless I have a negative association with it.
> Right now, I'd guess that the vast majority of computer users have
> never heard of VFP. If they see "Powered by Microsoft Visual FoxPro"
> in an application they use (and, of course, that works well for them),
> it gives them that little niggle of familiarity the next time they
> hear about the product. For those who have a negative association,
> it's one piece of positive information.

> It's designed to be a subtle reinforcer, not a marketing campaign in
> and of itself.

Let's play this out to see if there is any validity/reasonableness to this.
Are you saying that when people go to a store, take Best Buy for example -
people (namely software developers) will take a moment to see what the POS
software is written in? Assuming this is true, what will they see on the
screen? Most likely the main form the clerk works with. Will that be
plastered with "Powered by Visual FoxPro"??? Or, will the clerk have to be
asked to click the about button or choose the appropriate menu choice
(assuming there is one). Of course you know, asking the clerk would be a
waste of time.

Your theory is flawed on several fronts:

1. It assumes that applications heretofore not in VFP will be done in VFP.

2. Assuming that VFP can gain a foot hold, it assumes the company would want
to put in the stupid little about screen that would
show that the app was "Powered by Visual Foxpro".

3. It assumes that folks really care (NERDY) enough about what the store's
POS system is written in.

It is a total non-starter. You equate this wtih a label on a web page that
denotes the site is powered by IIS. An apples to oranges analogy. Although,
I would say that there is some similarity to the extent that the visitor
most often, could careless whether the site was powered by IIS, Apache, or
whatever...

Your thoery assumes first that the information is available. It is not
because the apps are not out there. Second, your theory assumes that people
would be receptive to the information. Third, your theory assumes that
people would act on the information - assuming the information was 1 -
available and 2 - they were receptive to it.

It is an idea with zero practicality and one that could not be taken
seriously.

BTW, nice article in Code Magazine (I mean that). My jaw dropped when I saw
that you wrote for a non-Advisor publication..

< JVP >

> No, I'm saying that many people use software packages in their own
> work. For the most part, I feel reasonably confident that most of them
> have no idea what the software's written in. As users, they will see
> splash screens and about screens. If it includes the "Powered by VFP"
> message, and _if_ the application works for them, they'll get a small
> positive reinforcement.

So it is your contention that the clerk who works at Blockbuster, Best Buy,
Pep Boys, WAWA (I will get to this one in a sec.) would really care whether
or not the app they use is written in Fox or any other language? What
exactly would be positively reinforced? I don't think the users/customer
really cares...And I have a specific case where I can illustrate the
point...

For many years WAWA (and for those of you that don't know what WAWA is, they
are convienence stores in the philly area . They are like 7-11's, but a lot
better in terms of quality ). In any case, their POS system, which was
written by a company called SASI - was written in Fox 2.5. How do I know
this? Because MEI trained SASI employees and I was a trainer at MEI. I
remember asking in the class whether folks at WAWA knew the POS software was
written in Fox. I seem to recall the response as being "Wawa did not
care..." So the bottom line is that it did not matter then and it would not
matter now. Also, that Fox software has long since been replaced with a
non-Fox solution.

I find all of this ironic in that on one hand, Fox developers at one level
will down-play Fox. Specifically, there was a push a fw years ago to instead
say "I'm a visual studio developer...". On the other hand, there is at times
a push, to bang the drum for VFP. Seems very inconsistient to me..

> Thanks. The article didn't seem a good fit for any of Advisor's
> magazines, but I thought it was worth writing, since I'd run against
> all that stuff in applications.

Why do you think it would would not be a good fit for either FPA or
Office/Access Advisor??

On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:49:41 -0500, "JVP" <nospam> wrote:

><<
> Thanks. The article didn't seem a good fit for any of Advisor's
> magazines, but I thought it was worth writing, since I'd run against
> all that stuff in applications
><<
>
>Actually, this response from you on this has me confused. Your article had
>Fox examples. How could it not be a good fit for FPA? And, if it was not a
>good fit for FPA, why would it be a good fit for Code? Code has greatly
>marginalized the amount of Fox content in the magazine.
>
>Seems to me it would have been a good fit for FPA.
>
>So, whats the story?

The article was really focused on Office issues, not FoxPro issues.
That the examples were written in Fox was incidental (and because
that's where I'm most comfortable). Yes, I could have published it in
FPA, but it really had a broader appeal. Advisor no longer has a
magazine that's really focused on Office stuff-the current title of
that one is something like Access-VB-SQL Advisor.

So, putting it in Code was a chance to reach a wider group of readers
with an article that had wide appeal.

Tamar

<<
Yes, I could have published it in
FPA, but it really had a broader appeal.
<<

Well...I suppose if you were interested in the piece getting read by more
than a few thousand people, then yes, moving beyond FPA was a good idea.
However, if you are *really* interested in targeting a broader audience,
then you need to move beyond your comfort zone and start working up your
examples in another technology. Since your piece had Fox examples, it will
be deemed a Fox piece. Your piece would have had broader appeal had it been
done in VB 6 and of course - .NET though COM/Interop.

< JVP >

<Tamar E. Granor> wrote in message
news:joom5v8g6ceo1832a0ug6jh2998ifosaab@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:49:41 -0500, "JVP" <nospam> wrote:
>
> ><<
> > Thanks. The article didn't seem a good fit for any of Advisor's
> > magazines, but I thought it was worth writing, since I'd run against
> > all that stuff in applications
> ><<
> >
> >Actually, this response from you on this has me confused. Your article
had
> >Fox examples. How could it not be a good fit for FPA? And, if it was not
a
> >good fit for FPA, why would it be a good fit for Code? Code has greatly
> >marginalized the amount of Fox content in the magazine.
> >
> >Seems to me it would have been a good fit for FPA.
> >
> >So, whats the story?
>
> The article was really focused on Office issues, not FoxPro issues.
> That the examples were written in Fox was incidental (and because
> that's where I'm most comfortable). Yes, I could have published it in
> FPA, but it really had a broader appeal. Advisor no longer has a
> magazine that's really focused on Office stuff-the current title of
> that one is something like Access-VB-SQL Advisor.
>
> So, putting it in Code was a chance to reach a wider group of readers
> with an article that had wide appeal.
>
> Tamar