> It was rumored that Microsoft bought it to put it to pasture because it was competing with MS Access And certainly, Fox was the more capable. Also, MS Access

> It was rumored that Microsoft bought it to put it to pasture because it was competing with MS Access And certainly, Fox was the more capable. Also, MS Access as UI builder was fine (a few nicer here and there) but scripting with VB was a joke. Is clear that the Fox language is a better match, and that is NOT "imho"!. But that was not the only competition: Sql Server. With Fox around, the need for Sql Server is near zero for a lot of small business. Contrast: The Engine of Access not only is a joke: is actively bad (corruptible) so is very fast you need a "proper" db! --- I know a good replacement was needed since the end of support from MS, but keep waiting for a replacement, thinking it was a no-brainer product to make. How foolish...