Re: EGL vs. Java

Joe,

You are right it is my opinion but it is based on facts. I understand and
do agree that other platforms have been per user priced and software
separate from hardware forever. I also have no issue with it as it is
dependable and reliable. IBM and the System i has been anything but for
at least 4 years now. Under this scenario how can shops plan properly /
accurately decide on an adoption plan? If IBM did as you suggest below I
think the complaints would decrease and new technology adoption might
actually increase because we would have stability and at least a degree of
certainty. That's all I am asking for a bit of predictability on the
platform, that would improve things drastically and maybe even drive some
innovation(there now I got to use a buzz word today!). And with that said
I will return to my normally scheduled show. Thanks for your insight with
these situations, it is nice having a level headed informed individual who
can at least calm the worried masses.

Joe Pluta wrote:

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


--

Weyco Group -

Florsheim, Brass Boot, Nunn Bush, Stacy Adams
Duane Kehoe Phone # 414.908.1814
EC / Programmer / Analyst Fax # 414.908.1601
Email: dkehoe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx