Re: EGL vs. Java

Dave Shaw wrote:

I'm eyeing this change with a bit of dread. Our machines are P50s with roughly 150 developers. I could see someone deciding that everyone gets ADTS only as a cost-saving measure. It would be so much easier to argue the case for getting RDi for those of us who want to use it if PDM wasn't part of the equation so that we would never need ADTS again...

And let me be clear. Not everyone is going to be happy with this. It's a tough proposition, and IBM put themselves in a deep, deep hole by giving away WDSC for so long. They had to figure out something to bring in revenue, and I can tell you that this option is better than others that have been floated during the past year or so (none of which I'll share, so don't ask <grin>). I think IBM tried very hard to move us from tier-based to user-based without a lot of disruption. I think the number of entitlements may be a bit low, especially on the larger boxes, but that's something for you to negotiate with IBM. But the general idea -- compilers on tiers, broken up by functional unit, and development tools by user, with seat-based pricing -- is solid.

It won't be a complete winner until things like SDA and RLU are completely replaced, and if there's a business requirement that someone like Dave Shaw has that exists in PDM and isn't addressed in RDi, then now is the time to put your cards no the table and ask IBM. Tell them why you need fast access to the first N members of a source file, and maybe someone can put in a quicklist feature for a table.

Joe