Re: IBM is so confusing!

["M. Lazarus" <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>]

Joe, Buck,

 I'm not following this reasoning.  It is fairly well established 
that RPG is the primary development language on the platform.  I 
don't know statistics on the runners up, but Cobol is probably the 
next most popular.  Putting exact numbers on it is futile.  Why?

1) IBM needs to produce development tools for RPG, Cobol and other 
languages, regardless of the exact numbers of users.  Otherwise, the 
platform dies.

2) If IBM does not enable the system to *easily* conform to current 
standards (native GUI, browser interaction integrated with existing 
languages, web services, etc, as just a few examples), the user base 
will continue to erode.  The cost to develop this should come under 
banner of "advertising, marketing and continued viability of the 
platform."  It's currently under the "Well, if they really, really 
beg us we'll do them a favor, but they'll pay for it dearly..."

3) If IBM would spread out the costs over all OS purchases, it would 
be a very small bump.  Instead, they are surprised when fewer than 
expected are successful in convincing management to spring for a cost 
they never had to pay for before.  As a consultant, I can rarely walk 
into a shop where they have RDi.  And if a few chosen programmers are 
allowed to have it it's usually considered a perk.  Whether it makes 
sense or not is not the point.  The point is that this cost model is 
make it more and more difficult for companies to stick w/ the i, let 
alone get new customers.

 -mark

At 2/10/2011 11:17 AM, you wrote:
> > If Rational sees a revenue stream from IBM i customers, that has to be a
> > good thing versus us being an anonymous aggregate.
> >    --buck
>
> It absolutely is a good thing to be able to point to specific revenue to
> justify the costs of further enhancements on the RPG and COBOL tools for
> the i.
>
> Joe