>SBT uses free tables, so if you are wanting to use DBC in your application, SBT tables cannot directly participate--only through views.

We're using views for the SBT data. The only problem with this, of course, is that those views cannot participate in transactions. Besides the source sode, this is my biggest complaint with SBT. Well, then there's the user interface...

>We do find that we have to understand SBT code when we must get into it directly. We just prefer not to because of the mix of old and new code, and the need to constantly supply customers with build upgrades (which they are required to buy for the first year). Too close an integration would mean that we have to maintain the build upgrades.
>I'd say that if you are totally separate from SBT you have to understand SBT transactions, but not necessarily the gnarly code that underlies some of it.

I don't know. SBT behaves differently depending on whether or not you have multiple locations, serialized inventory, etc.