Re: RDi vs SEU (was: Standard source file names?)

Let's be clear, SEU is a part of ADTS. ADTS is also a separately
chargeable product. I haven't checked its price in quite some time. But
when IBM unbundled everything at the announcement of V6R1 (yea, remember
how releases used to be named), both products were chargeable items: ADTS
and "Rational Developer for System i (RDi)." I think I've long since
purged my records of the pricing as it is well out-dated. But my
recollection is the prices weren't that far apart.

At the time V6R1 was announced, they granted a number of ADTS licenses
based on the processor tier. So anyone who had a system before V6R1 didn't
pay anything for ADTS (SEU). They also offer a trade-up from ADTS to RDi
for a decent discount. For us, as well as many shops, we had a lot more
ADTS seats than we would ever need. So we've traded up several ADTS
licenses to acquire RDi seats.

IBM said they were unbundling things so they could see where the revenue
went and allocate development resources accordingly.

"RPG400-L" <rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 04/02/2015 09:51:22
AM:

-----Original Message-----

From: John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx>

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Buck Calabro <kc2hiz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The low adoption rate speaks only to the fact that
this market genuinely feels that SEU is Plenty Good Enough.

OK. That sounds right to me. It also means the "problem", such as it
is, is just this side of intractable, because there are some powerful
chicken-egg relationships in play.

I maintain that the issue was never about the cost - everybody pays

for

SEU and SEU is pants.

I'm less convinced about this part of your argument. It's difficult
to fully extricate cost. But first I think it's worth clarifying:
Are you saying SEU is a separate cost from the compilers? You can buy
the compilers without buying SEU?

Buck had it wrong, it is all about cost. IBM is exploiting their
customers and then wondering why people leave the platform. They
refuse to update SEU and then have the gall to charge their
customers for an editor? I already pay for the languages. We paid
for ours by selling back seats on other machines we removed the
compilers from. Even then buying 28 seats is no small feat in penny
pinching companies.

RDi is vastly over priced, compared to Microsoft's visual studios
even v9 is a joke. Customization of even the look of RDi is a bear,
you cannot share color schemes, you cannot layouts, and more. Then
let us get into installing the beast. How convoluted can you get?
Before we pushed IBM you had to visit a minimum of three sites to
get the full install, one of which is not IBM owned. Do you still
need to go to the non IBM site for license keys?

Drop the price to free or at most a hundred bucks. As I started off,
IBM is exploiting their customers who have no real alternatives by
not updating the green screen product which only further confirms in
the eyes of many this system is dead or dieing.