Re: Is RDi ready for prime time?

I think it would help if we clarify exactly what we're discussing. According to IBM's page on ADTS (http://www-306.ibm.com/software/awdtools/wds400/about/adts.html), ADTS consists of the following:

* Source Entry Utility (SEU)
* Screen Design Aid (SDA)
* Report Layout Utility (RLU)
* Data File Utility (DFU)
* Character Generator Utility (CGU)
* Advanced Printer Function (APF)
* Programming Development Manager (PDM)
* Interactive Source Debugger (ISDB)
* File Compare and Merge Utility (FCMU)

It seems to me that RDi can completely replace SEU, SDA, and ISDB. If they continue to include CODE/400 in the package until the add print file design to the screen designer, RLU isn't needed either (my opinion, based on using CODE for print files for years). It's the other pieces that are still problematic, in my opinion.

Personally, I don't use FCMU because for what I use it for, the CODE compare is better. However, I believe that FCMU has features that none of the RDi compare tools duplicate. It seems to me that this would be fairly easy for IBM to fix.

There are still things that PDM can do that RSE can't do as well (and vice versa, of course). Setting aside any performance issues, commands with interactive screens are the most significant, I think. RSE builds lists as well or better than PDM, user actions when no screen is involved replace PDM user-defined options just fine, and that's really about all that PDM does directly.

CGU and APF are niche utilities. They're important to the people who use them, but I don't hear of many people that do.

DFU is used a lot, but there are lots of ways to work around not having it. Personally, I haven't used it in more than 15 years because every shop I've been in has had alternatives (DBU, EZView, WRKDBF, etc.).

It seems to me that the simplest solution would be to include the PDM, DFU, and probably CGU and APF components of ADTS in the RDi license - i.e. a developer can use them whichever development platform he's licensed for, until such time as replacements are incorporated into RDi or the need for them vanishes. That's my suggestion for the day.

Dave Shaw
Mohawk Industries

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Websphere Development Studio Client for iSeries" <wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Is RDi ready for prime time?

MichaelQuigley@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

I would concur with most of Joe's opinions. I'm fully sold on WDSc and
I'm certain I will be on RDi. However, there are functions which fall in
my responsibility as a senior analyst which I can't do in the workbench (a
generic term to make this simple). For example, at times I produce lists
of objects or source members with WRKOBJPDM. I use these as a checklist
for a project--e.g., upgrades of purchased applications, changes in
business rules, etc. WDSc (and I'm assuming RDi) don't print lists from
the table view, the RSE-tree view, iSeries search view, etc. Until such
time, I'll *need* an ADTS license to do my job--I can't do my job without
it. But I emphatically don't want to do my development in SEU.

And you know what? Until we started talknig about getting rid of ADTS,
much of this never came to light. And if it hadn't, you'd have gone on
using both ADTS and RDi. And if you did, IBM would have to continue to
invest money in both. Personally, I'd like them to freeze development
on ADTS completely and put all their money into adding the missing features.

I think there's no argument that editing is better in the workbench, but
the workbench hasn't replaced all the functions of PDM--particularly the
WRKxxxPDM functions. (Just to be clear, I like some of the features of
the table view or a filter better--e.g., member lists crossing multiple
source files, etc.)

So start entering problem reports, DCRs, whatever you can in order to
get this to the attention of the developers!