I am currently switching. After I have waded through to all the profile updates I will be only using Profiler 3 from here on out.
Until now I had my main database still in Profiler 2 for various reasons.

I'm one of the minority, who is still using 2.x only... but I've planed to switch after the DB-merginging is completed.

Quoting madacid:

Quote:
I'm one of the minority, who is still using 2.x only... but I've planed to switch after the DB-merginging is completed.

Dito!

I find that many of the newly submitted cover scans are of lower quality than the ones I have on 2.5. So I'm both saving 2.5 and adding newly acquired  DVDs to both. Every update on 3.0 I check every scan, noticing the quality of what I've imported over from 2.5. I have many scans locked as I update.

After the dust settles, I suspect I will be submitting many cover scans alone...

I'm going to continue to use 2.5 but only for personal home-burned DVDs.  Otherwise, I'm using only 3.0.

I'm using version 3. I worked with the older versions, but gonna start over with a new fresh database.

I'm no longer using 2.4;
But it's still on my hard drive and fully operational.
the last DVD i bought i only added to 3 version you know why.
It's simply the best and i don't see any reason to spend time on a worst DB.
But i'm also a nostalic guy and every now & then i like to see where i spent hours & hours & hours & hours for the last few years...

As of May, 19 2007, 18:19 MESZ (that is Central European Daylight Savings Time) I have uninstalled all previous versions of DVDP 2.x on my computers. I'm running solely DVDP 3.x und DVDP Mobile. I'm glad things worked out the right way in the last couple of weeks.

Quoting Kyle Pearson, a 1/6th member of IVS, LLC in the forum at IVS:
"This is also where I don’t really understand the reasoning.  The TRO and lawsuit stand to gain absolutely nothing.  Ken Cole never stopped talks about a buyout.  In fact, the TRO and lawsuit only served to put IVS into debt and ruin any following it might have had.  The problem with putting an LLC in debt is that the members are now responsible for that debt.  So me, not being part of the suit or wanting a TRO, had to pay money out of my pocket to for the debt “they” incurred for these actions.

Now, at this time, a buyout should have been completed between Invelos and IVS.  However, the current terms are half of what the original terms being offered before Invelos was in conception.  So what did the other members of IVS gain from all this?  Absolutely nothing."

What I think is especially important in this post is: The TRO and lawsuit stand to gain absolutely nothing

I know that I don't know, but having read the papers filed to court, the statements of Ken Cole, Jesse Slicer and now the opinion of Kyle Pearson, I know that some of the partners of IVS, despite having contributed to DVDP, just wanted to freeload.