Adam


In that case you go for version names

ElevateDB Impris

I always liked Windows NT (= New Technology) and then Window 2000 - based on NT Technology (= based on New Technology Technology)

Roy Lambert

Adam,

<< 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

SQL Server 7
SQL Server 2000
SQL Server 2005

Ole Willy Tuv

Roy,

<< I vote for changing them - in this instance. It'll allow V4 & V5 to
coexist peacefully (I hope) in the IDE. >>

They will be changed, you are correct, and yes, it is nice to be able to
have them both loaded at the same time.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Robert,

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

Yes.  The only part that bothers me is the fact customers may get the
impression that the version 5 designation imparts that ElevateDB is entirely
a direct upgrade to DBISAM.  It is in some ways, and in other key ways it
isn't.  I really can't go into too many details right now, but there are
some things that are very different than with DBISAM, some of which I've
mentioned and some that I haven't.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Adam,

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

No, you're correct, they are TEDBSession, TEDBDatabase, TEDBTable,
TEDBQuery, TEDBUpdateSQL, and TEDBStoredProc.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

>  it makes it difficult to know whether you've got the latest
> version

Or, for developers, it introduces a question about why you are still using
an old (but perfectly reliable and functional) integrated database when
there are much better ones. ElevateDB 2006 is going to look very old in
2011, yet it will still be a great database.

I say this as someone still selling a product with DBISAM version 1 in it.

/Matthew Jones/

"Tim Young [Elevate Software]" <timyoung@elevatesoft.com> wrote in message
news:C4555574-108D-4C1B-8247-38C62E58E37B@news.elevatesoft.com...
> Robert,
>
> << Tim, have you considered keeping the version number the same (version
> 5) even with the new database name? >>
>
> Yes.  The only part that bothers me is the fact customers may get the
> impression that the version 5 designation imparts that ElevateDB is
> entirely a direct upgrade to DBISAM.  It is in some ways, and in other key
> ways it isn't.  I really can't go into too many details right now, but
> there are some things that are very different than with DBISAM, some of
> which I've mentioned and some that I haven't.

OK, now you're scaring me.  

Seriously, I don't think that's too much of a problem.  Keep in mind that
your customers are developers, but ours are not.  Developers will understand
when you tell them it isn't a direct upgrade, and that there will be work
involved in making the switch.  (Heck, we're used to doing that most of the
time, anyway.)

Non-developers are going to have a hard time understanding that a product
called "Version 1" isn't truly a version 1, with the immaturity that usually
comes with a version 1 release.

> The only part that bothers me is the fact customers may get the impression
> that the version 5 designation imparts that ElevateDB is entirely a direct
> upgrade to DBISAM.

Having used DBISAM v1-v4, you could possibly say the same thing about each
version upgrade (SQL, C/S, SQL dialect, procedures, triggers, etc, etc).  If
this weren't so then there wouldn't be any reason to upgrade.  ElevateDB is
the next logical step on the path of excellence that started with DBISAM.

Regards,
Bill Miller

Roy,

> In that case you go for version names
>
> ElevateDB Impris

LOL - I guess both of us have been staying up too late.  

Cheers

Adam.

Tim


Good - that'll save some wear & tear on the old fingers <c>

Roy Lambert