My first impression? Inhospitable to Bit Che 1.0.
Since at the moment they use 2 different script sets, BC 2.0 shouldn't completely mess up any older installation.
I guess I assumed a non-install version meant it wouldn't drop files anywhere else.
I tried to run v1 and all my settings are gone, my passwords, my columns are a mess, etc.
It wouldn't be a bad idea to have BC2 install into a different directory and create a new settings.ini there just for itself.
Trying to get a grip on the new scripting language, but removing BC2 for now if keeping it means doing without BC1. 
yes.. it is true there was no design goal to allow bc2 to run side-by-side with bc1 since that version is no longer being 'officially' supported. bc2 attempts to upgrade and use as many settings as possible to make the transition as smooth as possible.
if you prefer bc1, then you can: a) restore the backup of bc1 settings: 'settings.ini.bak' to continue using bc1
b) then run bc2 from its own directory by putting 'settings.ini' in the same dir as bit_che.exe (for bc2 you do not have to set a portable=1 flag like you do for bc1).
bc2 adapts to your system.. you run it without install and it sets up its camp in its proper place (default).. if you include the 'settings.ini' with it, then it acts as portable. no fuss.. it just works.
design wise, i guess options would be to move from 'convivea\bit_che\' to 'convivea\bit_che2\' or move to 'settings2.ini' but i'm not sure that's smart. we haven't had many people throughout the betas concerned about running them side-by-side. and going forward, we will have less and less people concerned once they have bc2 up and running.
for the new scripting language, its basically the same as before, except just the functions are now more user friendly (easier names), and variable handling is much more powerful. the goal was to be far easier to learn and less confusing than bc1..
