>> (I can't understand that still effort is invested in Code/400 for example). The there are those of us who think that a little more effort on CODE would be a good idea. I'm delighted that you have the kind of PC required to run WDSc Paul - but we are having to go shopping this afternoon to check out the cost of brand new laptops because our two year old models do not have the horsepower/capacity to run WDSc. Does that mean that we and most of the 400 users we work with should be forced to go back to SEU ? Sorry, but since IBM can't make the current Eclipse based WDSc components function worth a damn on a 600Mhz PIII with 192Mb or memory (my current machine) then I have to stick with CODE until I can afford to replace the PC. Trust me - the amount if resource they are "wasting" (in your opinion) is a drop in the bucket and would have absolutely zero impact on developing the iSeries components within Eclipse. In fact, in my opinion, it has been the focus on Eclipse for the past couple of years that has caused us loyal CODE users to be scr*wed and to have to put up with a level of bugs which, were it not for the fact that it is _still_ much better than SEU, would have turned me off years ago! Sorry to get on your back Paul - this is a hot button for me. If you want to lay blame - lay it at the door of the Software Group executives who milk the 400 for all the revenue they can squeeze out of it, but refuse to allocate appropriate levels of resource! Jon Paris Partner400
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.