Re: CODE/400

** Reply to note from DAsmussen <DAsmussen@aol.com> Mon, 2 Mar 1998 20:14:31 EST

> I disagree.  I think that most posts have just reflected the management brick
> walls that most run up against when trying to get new tools.  You've got to
> admit, the "per seat" charge is pretty steep for CODE/400 -- especially when
> you consider that many (most?) companies violate their license agreements for
> VB and other similar languages by "plopping them in" wherever they feel like
> it.  Developers have to "choose their battles" carefully, and many need a
> hardware upgrade worse than they need a new development tool.

Dean, I disagree. The per seat charge for Code/400 is comparable with any
other software development suite with similar capability. Code/400 is a
development environment, not just an editor. 

If a company wants VisualBasic, or VisualAge for Basic, or VisualAge for
Java, then those suites are in the <$100 range. Code/400 not only provides
extensive tools, but also addresses a smaller market segment. Look at the
list of components in Code/400, compare it to other items on the market.
Take into consideration the Code/400 market. I don't see how Code/400 could
be a profitable item for IBM as it stands, with the small amount of market
adoption for the product, yet it see regular updates and is a top notch
product. 

If companies are going to steal software, whether that be Visual Basic or
Code/400, then they are going to do that. If IBM drops the price on
Code/400, it will simply mean that these companies are stealing a cheaper
product.

[snip]

> But, with the exception of the proprietary CASE tools (none of which provides
> adequate "Upper CASE" support) that the major manufacturing software suppliers
> have forced their customers into using, most Fortune/1000 companies with
> /400's do not utilize _ANY_ GUI development tool.  At least one of those
> suppliers (ahem) still doesn't provide its newest tool to their customers.

That's true, most AS/400 shops do not adopt anything new. There are a host
of reasons for this. I don't think that reducing the ticket price of
Code/400 will make much of a difference. Those buying Code/400 are likely
to finance the software purchase over a three to five year period and will
see the return faster than the investment. 

The trick is to get AS/400 shops to actually be willing to admit they might
not be perfect already. They are just darn near perfect, and need to touch
up a couple rough edges. 

> My thought _EXACTLY_!  I'm not familiar enough with the product to say what
> should and should not be included, but take a page from NetScape -- the base
> product is free, but you have to pay to get the "Gold" or "Enterprise"
> editions.  Perhaps even add a "Would you like to install the base version of
> our CODE/400 development tool?" prompt (with appropriate help text available)
> to the CA/400 install?  Maybe a 30 day free trial on the "Extended Edition"
> (whoops, probably a bad choice of words
> ;-)!).  Sounds like a winner to me!

Maybe there should be a CA, and a CA/Developer. When installing the
CA/Developer either a basic or full version of Code/400 could be installed.
The basic version of Code/400 could include the LPEX editor and debugger.
The screen/report designer should be additional, because it is in enough
demand that if people knew there was a really great solution out there for
layout they might license.

I would like to see this, obviously with the edges smoothed a bit. I think
that IBM should take full advantage of the expiration of the consent
decree, since the market has evolved since it's advent. 

> Dean Asmussen
 

Chris Rehm
Mr.AS400@ibm.net

How often can you afford to be unexpectedly out of business?
Get an AS/400.
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---