RE: CODE/400

Jon,

At 02:45 PM 3/2/98 -0500, you wrote:

> >> 1)  Most techies would like have better programming tools
>You could have fooled me judging from some of the posts on this topic.
>Although I admit that I'm happy to see it being aired in this fashion.
There's
>no such thing as bad publicity right ?

 There is certainly an inertia factor which can be overcome if the product
in question is easily available (i.e. just waiting to click on it) and easy
to use.

> >> 2)  IBM would like to promote their products and get better market
acceptance of the /400.
>For sure, but if we followed your suggestion at the end, where would we ever
>make any money ?  With the pressure o the price of the 400 itself, there
has to
>be profit in the software.  Making a loss on each box and making it up in
>volume doesn't work <bg>

 I certainly hope you're not losing money on the hardware!  As far as the
software is concerned, if you can sell 10 to 20 times the number of copies,
the price can drop dramatically, right?

> >> 3)  They currently have a good programming tool w/ a GUI interface.
>Not sure I understand this comment.

 I was trying to point out that the product is already developed, is
stable, has a GUI interface (which is a major plus in this "Windows"
world), etc.  RUN WITH IT!

> >> 4)  This tool currently has a relatively very low market penetration.
>As a percentage of all non-green screen development tools for the AS/400, it
>has a very high penetration.

 Unfortunately, that's not saying much, since there aren't too many of
those products out there. To add to this, I'm fairly certain that this is
the most comprehensive product of its kind on the market.  This is a unique
opportunity for IBM to take a lead in the market for a software product
(especially one that runs on a PC!)  It might give a facelift to the stodgy
perception of the /400 as a development platform.

> >> 5)  Many shops won't adopt it as the standard because it costs more,
>because it's not a staple in all shops, name your excuse, etc.
>I think "excuse" is the operative word in many cases.  Most managers
demand way
>more proof that programming tools to aid "conventional" (i.e. non-CASE)
>development will make their staff more productive than they ever do of CASE
>tools, WIndows NT, (name your own flavor-of-the-month).

 I'm sure that varies from shop to shop.  But, yes, managers do want a
"proof" of ROI.  They will not buy every tool that comes along on "spec."
Check out the trade pubs.  There are quite a few.

> >> Solution?  Easy!
> >> Include it in the application toolset (i.e. PDM, SEU, SDA, etc.)  If
>necessary charge nominally more (i.e. $25-50) for the suite.
>
>Oh how I wish it was easy!  A nominal charge would just get "lost" in the
books,  

 Then IBM has to find a different way to keep the books straight!  This
should be a strategic decision, not a bookkeeping one.

>there'd be nothing to show that the tool was being used and therefore
>with no $ and no definitive user base, to justify future enhancement.

 How do you know any product is being used?  Is this why we're not seeing
enhancements to PDM, SEU, SDA, RLU, CL, etc?

>Counter suggestion.  What if the base product were available free with ADTS,
>but you had to pay an additional fee for (say) the debugger, or screen
>designer, or verifiers, or ........  That way folks could use the base
function
>but would pay a fee for the enhancements.  

 While it would be a step in the right direction, you'd lose the major edge
that this product has over any of the competition.

>That would also allow for the
>development of future "plug-ins" since both IBM and third parties could see a
>revenue stream resulting from them.

 This could happen regardless of the full / partial product decision.  I
say get the product out there on as many desktops as possible.  Make it as
attractive and powerful as possible in order for the public to want to get
their hands on it and use it.

 Regards.

 -mark

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---