Midrange programmers didn't adopt the GUI IDE even when
it was bundled with the compilers.
While this is often used as evidence of low demand (and as
justification for the extra charge for RDi), I find any conclusions
derived from this particular fact kind of suspect. (1) The IDE at
that time was pretty crappy, judging by what I've read.
It was either not easy to use,
or it was too slow on the PCs most folks had back then.
(2) It was definitely not promoted well enough. I mean, think
of how few people know the proper naming for the midrange platform
itself. I'd guess far fewer even know that a GUI IDE exists, let
alone what it's called. (And Jon Paris amply demonstrated that the
naming of the IDE underwent changes comparable to the naming of the
managementIt's my opinion (and worth every penny you paid for it) that
Ifdeclines to spend the money on RDi because the demand is very weak.
the entire staff walked into the boss' office and said that they need
RDi, I think management would be much more likely to cut the check.
I don't disagree with any of that, but my (equally valuable) opinion
is that now would be a good time for IBM/Rational to revisit both
pricing and promotion for RDi. People these days have more powerful
PCs, the underlying Eclipse engine has (from what I gather) also
improved during these intervening years, and Java itself (which runs
Eclipse) has also improved. So it's probably much easier for RDi to
make a case for itself today than WDSC did back when it was bundled at
no extra cost. But people have to know it exists first.
When I say pricing should be revisited, what I mean is that IBM should
seriously consider bundling RDi with the compilers, and charge more
for the compilers.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact