Joe Pluta wrote:
Lots of information, and lots of free training available.
Come on Joe ... compared to JSP, HTML, CSS, and JS?
It's a BRAND NEW OFFERING ... that's not free to use (free trial doesn't
count). What is the incentive for organizations to adopt a tool that
has relatively high incremental cost with no assurance of ROI?
There are thousands of people out there who are razor sharp with the
core web technologies. Most of them learned the technologies without a
significant expenditure. How many are there who are expert in EGL?
And I have to keep hammering this home: it's easy. Very, very easy.
If you haven't done it,. you have no comparison.
And I can only say: It doesn't mater. Easy is irrelevant when the
initial & incremental cost is high. In todays IT environment, who's
going to invest in a new development environment when you have to pay
for each seat JUST TO LEARN.
How did Java get to be popular? Because the basic development
environment was FREE. If Sun had charged for the basic JDK do you think
it would be nearly as popular as it is now?
You could develop Java with notepad and a command line. No special
tools required. Even now, the most powerful tools are free.
If EGL were free in it's most basic form, them MAYBE I could see it
getting traction (kind of like WDSC Standard vs. WDSC Advanced). Let
people see the tool in it's basic form to develop applications, then
MAYBE you could provide another version with more advanced functionality.
Compare this to the amount of information and talent available for
JSP, HTML, CSS, and Javascript.
Not for business applications. I beg to differ. There aren't that
many developers who know how to write applications that interface
with RPG using stateful communications. Try to find one.
I know a few. Most are on this list.
Since EGL uses standard JSF for the UI, you're wide of the mark. Go
out there and see how much information is available on JSF; it rivals
other stuff. Sicne I use EGL primarily for the JSF interface, it
actually makes it easier than standard JSF.
Yes, but now we're back to the whole code generation question ... when
you use a tool that generates a lot of code for you, you don't have the
understanding of the code that's generated. Debugging generated code is
an exercise in frustration and hair pulling. Yes, EGL has a debugging
tool ... but now you're back to needing the tool to do basic functions.
You're missing the point, probably because you haven't used the tool.
I have to get out of this conversation, because the ongoing gist is:
"EGL is just too hard and too expensive to learn," from people who
have never used the product.
Never said it was too hard to learn ... I'm just saying it's more
expensive to use (and thus learn) than leveraging existing resources.
Yes, I have not used EGL myself ... I have no particular interest in
doing so at this point in time. But my arguments have nothing to do
with how easy or hard it is to learn & use. It's a mater of the cost to
learn & use.
As I have to get some work done today, I'm going to be dropping this thread.
david
midrange.com
