Re: WDSC V7 Turbo Boost

[Aaron Bartell <aaronbartell@xxxxxxxxx>]

I think adoption will slow considerably given the fact that there is no 
low cost entry into the "new WDSC" (i.e. RDi).  I still firmly believe 
IBM is shooting themselves in the foot by approaching it the way they 
did without even giving a single-seat-no-charge copy of RDi with every 
compiler purchase.  Get it into every shop so it becomes the house-hold 
name for doing RPG development, and then when the shop needs more than 
one license they get to get out their checkbook (but at this point they 
full recognize the ROI).

A 90-day trial will work well enough for existing WDSC users to 
determine if they want to pay for RDi, but I hardly believe it is enough 
time for an average SEU RPG programmer to make the switch from scratch.

It becomes an up-hill battle to educate people on such an excellent tool 
(which I believe it to be the best out there) when the only real way 
they can experience it is to get out their empty checkbook.  In the past 
I have done quite a few articles, sessions, newsletters, etc, promoting 
WDSC because it was simply a matter of getting through the politics and 
installing it on machines.  How do authors/writers promote it now that 
it costs so much?  I really wish IBM would have taken the MyEclipseIDE 
approach of charging maybe $50/year/user and then have all support done 
through an online forum and let the community resolve most of the issues 
instead of having to open up a PMR.  Heck, the IBM'ers on this list are 
already doing that to some extent (which I think is absolutely wonderful 
btw).

Those are my thoughts for a Friday :-)

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com

Trevor Perry wrote:
> David,
>
> Sorry - I finally realized you said 95% of THE shop.
>
> I am finding more and more shops are getting over their problems with the
> older versions of WDSC, and are adopting it fresh. If you treat it like it
> IS new, you may be able to convert everyone over!
>
> Good luck,
> Trevor
>
>
> On 1/9/09 8:57 AM, "Trevor Perry" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>