FM8 = FM 7.5

[joaocarlo]

humm, why not??

[Ender]

Humm, why?

You don't feel all these new features merit a full version number?!

[Lee Smith]

What difference does a number make. It's here, I like it, and I'm going to buy Advance as soon as I can afford it.

Lee

[comment]

What difference does a number make? About $ 200, I think.

[Lee Smith]

It would still be the same 200 whether it was called 7.5 or 8.

Were you not around when 5.5 came out?

Which has to have been the biggest ripoff of any application upgrade ever.

Lee

[comment]

Actually no, I wasn't. I was pefectly happy with 4 until 7 came out. I still see 3 - 6 as a single version (things multi-user possibly excepted).

[Lee Smith]

LOL,

I would have loved to had 4, 5, 5.5, and 6 treated as revisions instead of full version upgrades, but then FileMaker wouldn't have been around to release v7 or v8 by now either.

Lee

[Bailey Kessing]

The big difference is eliminating confusion about file format compatibility. It would be nice if the version indicated file compatibility.

[Lee Smith]

That is an excellent point.

[Ender]

I don't know, it seems to me if you build a solution in FM8, you will probably use some of those new FM8 features. Those features are not backward compatible.

I think the 8.0 version number makes good sense as this is a significant upgrade.

[Fenton]

Yes, it is a significant upgrade. But that's what "integer.5" traditionally meant (as opposed to 7.0v5 or 7.1). On Macs we are still on OS X (10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4), after several paid upgrades. It seems a minor point, but FileMaker's going to be incrementing numbers in a hurry at this rate. Maybe that's the reason, they're trying to catch up :-)