Change in naming convention of user’s Name parameter

I agree with so many comments on here, especially with Kevin Marquette.  It would cause much less of an issue if MS would just create a new attribute and go that route versus renaming an existing (and often used) attribute.  We have dozens of onboarding, offboarding, maintenance, etc. scripts out there that run on a schedule, now we have to go through each one to make sure that they all continue working?  And then combine that with the fact that this change will only impact some (new) objects, not existing ones!  Which sound to me like we'll have to also come up with some new try/catch stuff to test whether an object is using the old Name attribute or the new EDOID attribute.