Re: Cost of WDSCi (was Advanced vs. Standard)

                Jon,

You make the great point that bothers me on this. Say I convince my boss to use 
Webfacing saying IBM recommends using it as part of thier "Roadmap" to web 
developement. Hey why not its free right. So my boss is convinced and we 
webface all our applications. Now here comes IBM changing the rules and starts 
to charge us the seat license for each developer by moving this and other 
things to AE version. Wow what can we do now since we are married to the 
product so they have us and my boss is really upset with my decision. The next 
time why oh why would I consider believing anything IBM marketing says. I will 
just purchase a product so at least I know where I stand and most likely the 
price will be cheaper that 3500 per seat.

IBM please stay consistent with pricing, naming etc...  Please

Don N.

----------------------------------------

                                From: "Jon Paris" <Jon.Paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 4:46 PM
To: wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Cost of WDSCi (was Advanced vs. Standard) 

So are we complaining about the price of AE, or having to pay at all?

I think different people are complaining about different aspects. For
myself ...

A) The screen designer (and print file designer) should be part of the basic
WDSC and be included with the compilers.

B) The diagrammer is sufficiently advanced over Navigator (which even long
term CODE users often didn't know was there) that if they want to make that
part of Advanced I'm OK with that BUT only if Advanced is a reasonable
price. "Reasonable" would be about what I have to pay MS for a tool like
Office (i.e. in the $300 range) - NOT $3,500 for a single seat!

C) As long as pricing is reasonable - I don't have a problem with WebFacing
and HATS etc. not being part of the basic package. Although if I had
invested heavily in WebFacing while it was free I would be really annoyed.

Jon Paris
Partner400

www.Partner400.com