Matthew,

<< FWIW, I think I would too. DBISAM is a great database, but I can see that
there are things that ElevateDB will take to a new level. Better to keep
DBISAM supported and stable and make ElevateDB better. Then people can
choose where to take code. >>

I agree, and that's one of the reasons why we tried to move everyone over to
ElevateDB as quickly as possible, or at least tried to get them to take a
look.  There are a lot of miles left on ElevateDB due to the design, and it
should provide a nice platform for at least the next 8-10 years.  DBISAM
lasted us from 1999 until this year (and onward, of course), so we got 8
years out of it.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

IIRC, Microsoft start charging serious money for support after an official
end of life. So you'd formally state that v2 would stop being supported
one year after v3 is released as stable. There would be an option though
for people to buy continued support for a year at $1,000 (say). After the
first additional year, continued support would be $5,000 (say). And so on
until no one is paying. And of course you can't just jump into support
after 5 years by paying the fee (though you might accept the accumulated
fees to get a lump sum of $50,000 8-). The key here is that it is worth
your while keeping current because people are paying increasing amounts of
money until no one cares.

I'm not suggesting this now, but perhaps for ElevateDB v1/v2.

/Matthew Jones/

> When would you suggest that we should have stopped providing updates for
> 3.x ?  Should we have kept it going until Delphi 2008, 2009, etc. ?
> Eventually we *do* have to stop providing updates for a major version, so
> why was our decision bad (3.x was 2 years old when we froze it) compared
> to a later decision ?  At some point you're simply going to make someone
> mad no matter what you do.  The issue is how to balance that against the
> amount of time/money it costs to keep a major version alive.  We thought
> that the 2 years was fair given the upgrade pricing for 4.x and the fact
> that we announced it several times in advance.


How hard would it be for you to compile a D2007 version of 3.30, and only
bundle
with a new version?  I bet your legacy users would be willing to purchase
D2007 4.x if a 3.30 version was bundled in.  OTOH, you may lose a user
altogether by not supplying what is seemingly so simple just because you
don't want to.

Another example.

I use 3.26.  I can't compile it, so I'm moving to 4.x, which will be my last
DBISAM version.  After that, I will scale to MS-SQL server.  Why?  Because
to move to ElevateDB would be just as much work as a move to MS-SQL.  And, I
can bank on the fact the 4.x won't be around when D2009 comes out (using
your present philosophies).

John

> I had expected that a simple task like provinding D2007 compatibility for.
> v3  to be
> already done. The good engineers that did DBISAM are the most entitled to
> do the fixes


You are speaking to deaf ears.

John

> IIRC, Microsoft start charging serious money for support after an official
> end of life.

ElevateSoft is no Microsoft.

JohnE


>How hard would it be for you to compile a D2007 version of 3.30, and only
>bundle
>with a new version? I bet your legacy users would be willing to purchase
>D2007 4.x if a 3.30 version was bundled in. OTOH, you may lose a user
>altogether by not supplying what is seemingly so simple just because you
>don't want to.
>
>Another example.
>
>I use 3.26. I can't compile it, so I'm moving to 4.x, which will be my last
>DBISAM version. After that, I will scale to MS-SQL server. Why? Because
>to move to ElevateDB would be just as much work as a move to MS-SQL. And, I
>can bank on the fact the 4.x won't be around when D2009 comes out (using
>your present philosophies).

Hmmm. So M$ never discontinue a product, always provide brilliant support and charge very reasonable prices. I live and learn!

Roy Lambert

JohnE

>ElevateSoft is no Microsoft.

So
1. what does that have to do with the pricing?
2. in that case why should they do what M$ doesn't?

Roy Lambert

"JohnE"  wrote:

>How hard would it be for you to compile a D2007 version of 3.30, and only
>bundle with a new version?  I bet your legacy users would be willing to purchase
>D2007 4.x if a 3.30 version was bundled in.  OTOH, you may lose a user
>altogether by not supplying what is seemingly so simple just because you
>don't want to.

I assume you read this part of an earlier post from Tim:

>>Actually, in a lot of cases it costs us more than that.  The fact is that if
>>we continue to provide updates to a version, then we are obligated to keep
>>providing bug fixes and new updates.

Isn't there also a liability for bug fixes and maintenance created by continuing to
provide compiled sources? As an end user I often felt put upon when required to purchase
an upgrade. I'm not currently selling software to developers, but I think Tim explained
fairly well (and with patience) the some of the problems involved. It may not be
physically or economically possible to continue to spend time on old stuff. Each previous
version becomes a greater drain on resources. I would not want to maintain 4 versions of a
similar product (In this case v3.3, v4.25, EDB 1.02, and EDB 1.03).  

>to move to ElevateDB would be just as much work as a move to MS-SQL.

I have EDB. I haven't tried to convert yet, but are you sure that the move you are
suggesting is of the same level of difficulty? If you are using pessimistic locking, would
you be using pessimistic with SQL server? Are you using any navigational code? What would
you do about that?

I can think of some valid reasons to use SQL Server, and also some reasons to use MySQL,
but I would not count the 2 reasons you gave among them.

Dave M

> 1. what does that have to do with the pricing?
> 2. in that case why should they do what M$ doesn't?


1. Which Microsoft products? OS? You can't compare OS to this.

2.  Because people make buying decisions based on many factors.  If you want
me to choose identical scenarios and price points between Elevates and MS,
then MS will win every time.

So, what's the Elevate edge?  What makes them better?  cheaper pricing? or
better support? or longer support?

It's a no brainer for Tim to compile 2x, 3x, 4x for D2007, and make
available to 4.x users. Without doing that, he will lose customers, I can
promise you that. It's just too easy not to do it, and anything else is just
an excuse.

John

> Hmmm. So M$ never discontinue a product, always provide brilliant support
> and charge very reasonable prices. I live and learn!


SQL Server Express is free.  You can't get much cheaper than that.  That's
why I think it's nuts for Tim to try and compete with that.  The Elevate
value proposition is waning, imo.

John