UTF support sheduled to 2.0

[Ron]

Hi Lynn, Ruslan

> 
>> Well, this is bad news indeed. There are lots of us, especially those
>> who develop with RB, that absolutely require UTF support to move

I too am disappointed and have been waiting to move a product forward with
unicode. I'm RR, not RB, so I was hoping for utf16. Ruslan had recently
stated that utf16 would not be until 2.0 so my bubble had already been
burst. However,
 
> UTF8 support is a must, and in fact, UTF16 support is going to come as
> well, because it brings with it significant benefits for creating
> database solutions in Japan and other 2-byte markets. Japan is, bar
> none, the second largest language market for REALbasic as well.

I take comfort in the fact that Lynn understands the Japanese market and
makes it a priority.
 
> Adding new features to both 1.x and 2.x products is significantly
> slowing down development for 2.x, and 2.x is the future of Valentina.

I'm not privy to the workings of Valentina, but this makes sense. The
difference in time between 1.9.8 and a 1.9.9 may not be significantly
different than the gap between 1.9.8 and 2.0 since they have been working on
it for 'over a year'.

The cost will be more. Before we were getting unicode for the price we paid
for 1.9 and now we will be paying for the upgrade. We will be getting faster
performance (is that really possible?) and a more stable Valentina, so it
does have value.

All I can say is thanks for your work and get it out soon!

Thanks
Ron