even if i do go to RDi (sticking with WDSC until IBM scraps it...why not
it's "free" right?) i *still* want PDM...i use it for object changes (i.e.
mass update of user profiles, etc) vs. writing programs to do those
functions. PDM is *much* more than a Program Development Manager!
Thanks,
Tommy Holden
From:
Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
To:
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
12/05/2008 10:38 AM
Subject:
Re: SEU vs. RDi vs. ?
Sent by:
midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "McKown, John"
On the z, we use ISPF ... similar to SEU.
I used ISPF initially for 5 years. There was essentially no learning
curve to switch to PDM & SEU. And not much of a curve to switch from
COBOL, SAS, and Easytrieve to RPG.
Currently, I use PDM for most work, and occasionally fall back to WDSC for
its utility to convert RPG fixed to RPG free form. I have a preference
for thin 5250 based interfaces over thick PC based interfaces. I don't
like watching the progress bar iterate back and forth 3 times when saving
a file, for example.
On the other hand, I know other developers who give more weight to the
various features found only in RDi. And if IBM were to drop support for
PDM, I'd probably switch to RDi, and not think much about it. Just adapt.
But I don't see IBM dropping support for PDM. I see a niche for both thin
and thick client interfaces. So you have your choice.
Nathan.
midrange.com
