Re: *CURRENT library? was RE: (no subject) -- CODE400-L

--
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
For whatever its worth Phil, I'd add my experience and dread.  Jeff's
comments go only part way with the problem.  I had Code/400 up and working
and liked it and used it.  Along came a new version and suddenly I lost the
Help. A day or two was lost trying to figure out the solution but I never
did get it working.  When the next version came along I decided I'd do the
upgrade and see if Help came back.  It didn't, but response time got worse
and stability plummeted.

Since then I haven't dared anymore upgrades  -  it is just too expensive.
Probably your paycheck comes along every week whether you can do productive
work or not, but when I lose my tools, I lose my income.  I haven't yet
found a client that will pay me to troubleshoot IBM troubles.

(By the way, lest you think I am bashing IBM, its also the reason I don't
use Word, Outlook Express, IE, or any other of MS's tools designed to give
me the full MS experience.  They were the ones that taught me to let the
other guy have the thrill of the new disaster.)



---------------------------------------------------------
Booth Martin   http://www.MartinVT.com
Booth@MartinVT.com
---------------------------------------------------------

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

From: code400-l@midrange.com
Date: Sunday, October 13, 2002 12:18:43 PM
To: CODE400-L@midrange.com
Subject: Re: *CURRENT library? was RE: (no subject)

Jeff, I understand and fully appreciate your frustration. Clearly, we have
room to improve
something here if you are feeling that way... that is precisely the
opposite of our goal :-).
I will say this move is a one-time deal, and part of a migration strategy
for every AD product
IBM sells, to move to an eclipse base. The last time we did something
anywhere near this big
was 1997 when we ported to OS/2. Let me clarify my comment on the next
release... it will
contain a lot of new enhancements, but still will be a superset of what is
there today. It is
another typical release, not a cause for major re-education, nor concern.
The heavy lifting
of the initial re-design and port was done for 4.0, and now we are in
iteration phase, much as
we were for 5 years on OS/2, and the last 5 years on windows. The point of
my comment was
to assure Vern we are working hard at delivering the functionality he
states is the base line for
the new tools (parity with CODE).

Meanwhile, I think you are saying that you are left in a position where you
want to use the
new stuff one day, but need to use the classic stuff today, and that
classic stuff needs something
changed... namely the 10-year old design requiring a current library per
user. IBM saying the
new generation tools will solve it doesn't help you right now. Is this a
correct assessment? I
don't pretend to have an answer, but the first step to that is a clear
definition of the problem.

Thanks Jeff... and hang in there!

Phil Coulthard, iSeries Software Architect, IBM Canada Ltd.
coulthar@ca.ibm.com. 905-413-4076, t/l 969-4076
--
[ IMSTP.gif of type image/gif deleted ]
--