Re: RDi way ahead -- WDSCI-L

Those factors are certainly also part of the story Mark - no argument from me there. The point I was trying to make was related to Greg's statement re the lack of support for SEU forcing the update whereas from what i have seen that has had a much smaller impact.

I would LOVE to think it played a big part. Sadly though many RPGers still live in RPG III land and do not exploit the new features and consequently never notice the SEU issues.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com

On Mar 8, 2017, at 7:01 PM, mlazarus <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jon,

I would like to suggest that there were other factors in play at the time.

1) Many shops (probably the vast majority) in the Midrange community do not want to be on the bleeding edge. So adoption rates of workflow changing products tend to be slow. When IBM starting charging for it it had already been somewhat proven by the early adopters.

2) At that time, the demands on PC CPU power and memory requirements were quite high relative to what most people had on their desktop. When IBM started charging, the next generation of PC's had come out and it could now run decently.

So, I think that some of the adoption boost is coincidental to the timing.

My experience at several companies (especially the smaller ones) is that management will refuse to pony up for "extra" software that is hard to quantify ROI, especially at that price point.

I would really love it if IBM would bundle it into the compiler product. I think there would be an even substantially higher adoption rate than there is now.

-mark

On 3/8/2017 6:39 PM, Jon Paris wrote:

Sorry Greg but I think you are wrong.

We do a lot of RDi training and it was when IBM started charging that people started paying attention. Whether that was due to a change in perception because "It can't be any good if it is free" or what - but the minute there was a charge for the product requests for training went up three or four fold.

There was also a bit of a boost around the time that folks realized that IBM was no longer enhancing SEU (V61. being the last update) but nothing like as big a surge. I know from talking to others that they experienced the same thing we did.

Those who care about and use the new features of the system are the same ones who pay attention to press releases, and lists like this and are aware of the tools such as RDi.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com

On Mar 8, 2017, at 12:04 PM, Greg Wilburn<gwilburn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I would not equate RDi gaining traction with when IBM started charging for it... It's more like when IBM STOPPED supporting SEU to force the issue. New BIFs and free-format control specs are not available in SEU. THAT was when it started gaining traction - We (I mean I) had no choice then.

My point was this (when we went to a box with v7r1)... how can IBM charge for a compiler on the IBM i and not provide a fully functional source editor to go along with it? The compiler is not user-based. Why should the editor be user-based?
IBM has basically mandated RDi... yet the selling/licensing system for the IBM i cannot handle the licensing model for PC software.

At IBM, there is a great deal of "pounding a square peg into a round hole" simply because no one can seem to step back and see the big picture. I have some personal insight.

-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of MichaelQuigley@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 11:35 AM
To: wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] RDi way ahead

"WDSCI-L"<wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 03/08/2017 05:10:06 AM:

----- Message from Tim Fathers<X700-IX2J@xxxxxxxxxxx> on Tue, 7 Mar
2017 09:35:41 +0000 -----

To:

"Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client
for System i& iSeries"<wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject:

Re: [WDSCI-L] RDi way ahead

It wasn't my intention to start an editor war, . . .

I understand and appreciate that. And I can understand irritations and frustrations with software. I deal with it every day running MS-Windows. I was glad when the PC group took my PC to install Windows 10 and the system rejected it. I'm still stuck with 8.1 when I would rather have 7, but some days I feel like I spend more time helping those who are on Windows 10 with simple Windows tasks than I do on my own work.<end rant>

. . .
. . .
. . .

talent and persuade people to use up-do-date tools, well why not raise
the barrier to entry even higher by charging a small fortune for

them?"

Try pricing other versions--e.g., Rational Application Developer for WebSphere. You can get a user license for around $5800 (USD), but if you really like the idea, buy the floating license for $10,200 (USD). The full price user license for RDi is $1090. Talk to your business partner and you can probably get that down.

Would I rather not pay anything for it? Of course, but I can easily recoup the cost in productivity gains. It's been pointed out IBM had WDSC available for years with no additional charge over buying the compilers and it never gained any traction. Once they started charging for it, there was a real uptake in interest. Go figure . . .

<restart rant>
My take on getting so many of the MS tools for free. Great, but you'll have to buy a new version of Office, etc. every few years--and then you can buy training to learn to use it because the interface will change. Why does the interface change? Because they can sell you more training, books, etc. And then you'll want to redesign all your work to match the new interface, and then . . . .

My wife shared with me some challenges going from one version of MS-Access to another a couple years ago. The function hadn't changed--just the way you find it. I should probably be a little forgiving on this one because Eclipse does foist some changes on us now and then. But I've never felt like I needed to learn a whole new interface.

We have programs running (now fully 64-bit RISC programs) which were compiled in the 1980s. They haven't been recompiled because they do their job--consistently, stable and reliable. No changes needed, no user retraining for the new interface.
</end rant>

If someone doesn't want to use RDi or doesn't like it, they don't have to.
I love it and I'm thankful my employer chose to spend around $600 to swap an ADTS license for the RDi license several years ago. I'm sure the price for that exchange has gone up.
--
This is the Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i& iSeries (WDSCI-L) mailing list To post a message email: WDSCI-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.
--
This is the Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i& iSeries (WDSCI-L) mailing list
To post a message email: WDSCI-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.

--
This is the Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i & iSeries (WDSCI-L) mailing list
To post a message email: WDSCI-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.