Re: EGL vs. Java

Duane Kehoe wrote:

<rant>
I do agree that a "kick the tires" period is very important. Having said
that I think the real thing for IBM is to stop with the bait and switch
tactics. Within the past few years there have been at least 3 or 4 really
interesting new technologies introduced by IBM for free only to be changed
to pay for items a year or so later.

Duane, I'll just drop in my half a nickel because this really is an opinion post and as you know I'm trying really hard this year to stick to facts, because if opinions were airplanes, this list would be O'Hare <grin>.

Personally, I agree that the bait-and-switch tactics were reprehensible. And remember, that also includes WebSphere Application Server itself - it was free as well! But I think the situation is that the price of System i software used to be bundled into the hardware, or into the OS, or into the interactive tax. We screamed and complained to get rid of all those taxes, and rightly so I think, but the reality is that now there is no revenue stream for tools.

We in fact were supremely lucky that IBM bought the Rational tools and that someone inside of IBM cared enough to make sure those tools were compatible with the System i. They didn't have to; they could have let the platform dwindle off into the PDM/SEU/SDA sunset (and a lot of people in our community would have been tickled pink - you may recall the "green screen only" days!). And certainly nobody outside of IBM except for the legacy vendors has given a damn about i5/OS.

But the reality is that, in order to even attempt to get the platform to generate self-sustaining revenue, the company iwll have to charge for tools the way everyone else does: by the seat. Yes, there are free copies and community editions and blah-de-blah, but in general those are financed by the for-fee side of the respective companies - Windows subsidizes Visual Studio, and Red Hat subsidizes Fedora. And Fedora's even got a hidden cost: you are in effect the beta tester for the next version of Red Hat.

Anyway, user-based pricing is here to stay. Now if only IBM would figure out a reasonable price, put it up front, and offer a normal entry-level strategy, be it community edition (full featured but no support), crippleware (missing enterprise features, or with size limitations) or timed expiration, and make sure pricing is clear and concise from the get-go, I think we'll be okay.

This has really changed my boss'
mindset when it comes to new technologies from IBM as he is tired of
investing time and resources to research the tools, sometimes even doing a
couple small projects with the technology only to have IBM pull it out
from underneath us. Specifically, EGL fits this example, it was free in
WDSC v5 and 6 only to become a pay for in v7. Webfacing also falls into
this category as I now understand there is a per seat usage license
requirement. For me the issue underlying all of this topic and other
recent ones is IBM's business decisions and how they effect their
customers, which from my perspective is sorely in need of review at IBM.

I think IBM simply has to stop giving away their tools unless they mark them clearly as "technology previews". You use them simply to see if you're willing to pay for them later. And then, once the tool is ready for General Availability, they then offer some sort of entry-level version as I outlined above. Try to stick with a single strategy, but that's difficult. For example, most Unix dweebs would feel comfortable with crippleware, while PC weenies love timed expirations. Green screen dinosaurs need a community edition, because we'll never get done in time for a timed expiration, but we usually need the enterprise features that a crippleware version would lack.

The simple question for me is: Why would anyone try a new tool /
technology from IBM today that is considered a production product being
provided for free when every ounce of their judgment is telling them IBM
is going to turn around and turn this into a pay for item in the next
version? What is gained for the shop? - Nothing except a process that
will either require a costly upgrade fee or a complete rewrite in a
technology already owned.

I understand. The answer is that NO TOOLS ARE FREE, and IBM has to make that position clear.. We used to hide the cost in our expensive hardware and system software, but the reality is that as thoser prices come in line with the rest of the community, we'll have to pay for our tools, or else commit our companies to freeware solutions. And IBM needs to be more upfront about the pricing from the get-go.

Joe