I vote yes for this too.
I vote yes for this too.
I vote yes for this too.
I vote yes for this too.

OK.. sorry..

Regards,
Scott.


"Roy Lambert" <roy.lambert@skynet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8470E4F2-055E-4CB6-9555-E9CB33A664DC@news.elevatesoft.com...
> Tim
>
>
> I vote for changing them - in this instance. It'll allow V4 & V5 to coexist peacefully (I hope) in the IDE.
>
> Roy Lambert
>

"Roy Lambert" <roy.lambert@skynet.co.uk> wrote in message news:8470E4F2-055E-4CB6-9555-E9CB33A664DC@news.elevatesoft.com...
> Tim
>
>
> I vote for changing them - in this instance. It'll allow V4 & V5 to coexist peacefully (I hope) in the IDE.
>
> Roy Lambert
>

it is absolutely imperative the V4 and V5 be able to co-exist in the IDE

gregF

Just asking... why is it imperative that they coexist.
Switching between versions has never been an issue in
the past. I did this for awhile with v3 & v4.

It was just a matter of a single click before Delphi
loaded.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice but I'm not sure I would want
to cause Tim to escalate this feature above all other features.

Jon

GregF wrote:
> "Roy Lambert" <roy.lambert@skynet.co.uk> wrote in message news:8470E4F2-055E-4CB6-9555-E9CB33A664DC@news.elevatesoft.com...
>
>>Tim
>>
>>
>>I vote for changing them - in this instance. It'll allow V4 & V5 to coexist peacefully (I hope) in the IDE.
>>
>>Roy Lambert
>>
>
>
> it is absolutely imperative the V4 and V5 be able to co-exist in the IDE
>
> gregF
>
>

--
Jon Lloyd Duerdoth
Welsh Dragon Computing
   http://www.welshdragoncomputing.ca
Visit All Saints' Kingsway Anglican Church
   http://www.allsaintskingsway.ca

Jon


Its not essential, but there's going to be major major differences between DBISAM and ElevateDB. The product name is changing so it doesn't make sense to keep the same component names. Also component names have nothing to do with the bells and whistles.

Another thought is that having different component names will make it possible to build programs with both DBISAM and ElevateDB in them and that might be very useful for some upgrades where ElevateDB doesn't do things in the same way as DBISAM. The only one that comes readily to mind is the differences between V3 and V4 for tables stored in blobs.

Roy Lambert

or de-upgrading from V5 back to v4?

Roy Lambert wrote:
<snip>>
> Another thought is that having different component names will make it possible
> to build programs with both DBISAM and ElevateDB in them and that might be
> very useful for some upgrades where ElevateDB doesn't do things in
the same way as DBISAM.

--
Jon Lloyd Duerdoth
Welsh Dragon Computing
   http://www.welshdragoncomputing.ca
Visit All Saints' Kingsway Anglican Church
   http://www.allsaintskingsway.ca

Tim, have you considered keeping the version number the same (version 5) even with the new database name?  Part of our challenge is convincing
customers that our choice of database is a good one, and obviously there is no name recognition to trade on like there would be something like
MySQL or MS-SQL.  If they get the wrong impression that this is a brand new version 1 product, with all of the typical problems that go along with a
new product, that isn't going to help any.  I also don't relish the idea of trying to explain to upgraders that they aren't *really* switching databases
once again.  I know that in reality it makes no difference what your database is called, but in marketing, impressions are critical.

Does that mean TEDBTable and TEDBQuery, or do you want to tease us, and keep
those names a secret for a couple more weeks?  LOL

Cheers

Adam.

Tim,

> Tim, have you considered keeping the version number the same (version 5)
> even with the new database name?

I'd like to back Robert on this. It would be nice to start with ElevateDB
v5.

Don't worry about the numbering... if Microsoft can jump from 3.11 to 95 -
surely we can start at 5.

Cheers

Adam.

Adam


In that case why not ElevateDB 2006 - that nicely obfusticates the issue!


Roy Lambert

Roy...

> In that case why not ElevateDB 2006 - that nicely obfusticates the
> issue!

Nooooo. I retract my statement.

While it might look trendy, but unless their's going to be a new version
every year, it makes it difficult to know whether you've got the latest
version, or if you've missed a version, etc. Maybe not to us frequent
newsgroupers though.

Then again, on the other hand, maybe that could force Tims hand to release a
new version every year, with more beautiful features each time... I may have
to reconsider.

Cheers

Adam.