Re: RDp v7.5

Wow Joe, lighten up! Attack? Really? I just saw some comments
expressing different opinions than yours, but perhaps that constitutes
an attack in these distrustful times... Honestly, Joe, I think you
damage your credibility with these rants.

FACT: We who have attempted to use IBM's client tooling, have been
forced for years to actually use Code/Designer. There WAS no
alternative, except SDA. If one wanted to USE the client tooling that
IBM gave/sold to us, that meant installing CODE/400 and Designer. IBM
promised us a native eclipse version of Designer years ago. In the
meantime, while IBM was writing this plugin, we have learned how
Code/Designer works, and we have all developed opinions for what we
liked and did not like about this tool.

I'd wager that most long time users of WDSC have installed CODE/400, for
no other reason than getting Code Designer. Everyone I know that uses
WDSC/Rdi also uses Screen Designer. Why? Because this was the client
development tool IBM gave us!

Regards,
-Eric DeLong

-----Original Message-----
From: wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Joe Pluta
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 12:06 AM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client
forSystem i & iSeries
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] RDp v7.5

Vern Hamberg wrote:

Jon

You're not responding to Jon, Vern, you're attacking me. Have the
courtesy to do so directly.

I agree that there isn't that much new in Screen Designer. My post

about

Joe's article - well, I believe I quoted something that said the idea

of

"screens" is something we haven't had.

Something that was comparing RDPi to SDA. Clearly and specifically. One

of the big knocks against WDSC and RDi was the lack of a replacement for

SDA. It's there now. That was my point. Miss it and the rest of this
argument becomes futile.

Well, we HAVE had it, as you know
- and since at least 1998 in the CODE Designer.

CODE is dead. I wasn't comparing to CODE. CODE is dead.

This cannot be mitigated
by saying you are comparing only SDA and Screen Designer. The fact is,

the concept of screens is NOT new, it HAS been around for years.

Not in SDA. Most green screen programmers use SDA, not CODE. I was
comparing to SDA.

The Screen Designer might be rewritten from the ground up - but its
design is very much like that of CODE Designer - I have looked at the
technology preview and find it has so much of what CODE has. The
interface is about the same.

While the functions are the same, Screen Designer is about as different
from CODE as it can be. It's Eclipse-based. It uses properties. It
has a drag-n-drop palette with accordion selection. It uses tabs, not a

ring of documents. It's a different beast.

But again, I wasn't comparing to CODE, I was comparing to SDA.

There has been an argument that RDi 7.5 was a complete rewrite. Yes,
perhaps under the covers. But the appearance, the interface is not all

that different. And the rewrite has not justified moving to it for

many

folks. There have to be other factors to make it worth moving to, IMO.

I never said that RDPi is vastly different than RDi. I in fact noted
that the Screen Designer in RDPi is very much like the Screen Designer
in WDSC.

However, at the risk of repeating myself yet again, I was not comparing
Screen Designer to CODE, I was comparing it to SDA. I don't know many
people who used CODE. I sure didn't.

Joe