× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



That made me laugh. We got a new head of customer service recently and he made everyone in that department (including credit!) get rid of their desktop calculators.

After a very short time, there was enough of a push back that they got the calculators back - at least for a while. You should have seen them dancing into and out of the office they were stored in!


-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Killian
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 9:07 PM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i & iSeries
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Software fixes for older releases

<snip>
Do the accountants really need XCEL? What is wrong with calculator?
</snip>

-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of mlazarus
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 8:00 PM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i & iSeries <wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Software fixes for older releases

Jim,

If you do the math, IBM is actually coming out ahead, not taking anything on the chin. Right now they are losing quite a bit due to the cost factor.

Manager: We're ordering a new system. We need to keep the costs down.
Tell me what products are absolutely necessary.

Programmer: The compilers, PDM, and, uh, RDi.

Manager: I'm OK with the compilers and PDM, but do you really *NEED* RDi? Haven't you been using SEU for many years and been very productive?

Programmer: Well sure, but I will be more productive with RDi!

Manager: Let's see, we have 5 seats to buy @ $913.00 per seat = $4565.00
(source:
https://www.ibm.com/us-en/marketplace/rational-developer-for-i/purchase), plus maintenance. You know what, let's wait and see if you REALLY need it.


To address your statement: "No other vendor bundles the IDE in with the system, you have to order and pay for it." So are you advocating paying extra for DB2 or any other service that's currently included that isn't on other platforms?? All I'm suggesting is that this is a development tool that should be included when purchasing the native development tools. A small bump in the WDS price for everyone should more than cover the cost.

-mark


On 1/31/2018 3:03 PM, Jim Oberholtzer wrote:
May assumption was you were adding $100 to the price of the compiler.

You can order RDi two ways. If you order it as an LPP then it would
get buried as you suggest in the total cost of the system. But too
many managers look for large numbers in the config and blast them out.
Or you can order from Software Advantage. Then the delivery mechanisms change.

If you have a business partner worth a salt, they can order either
way, but believe me they will need to be told to order it in the first
place. Most partners are working to keep the cost of acquisition down
as low as possible to keep pace with the Intel crowd. If you start
incrementally adding cost to the acquisition, then IBM i loses parity
with the other solutions and loses again.

Bottom line: No other vendor bundles the IDE in with the system, you
have to order and pay for it. Why should IBM take it in the chin when
the competition doesn't?


--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects


-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
mlazarus
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 1:37 PM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client
for System i& iSeries<wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Software fixes for older releases

Jim,

Why do you say that? I have no way of veryfying the actual
numbers, but let's take a stab at it. If there are 50+ boxes with a
WDS license for every RDi license, IBM would actually be way ahead of the game!
Asuuming a $100 increase per WDS license, that would more than cover
the "seat" price differential for RDi. I suspect that the number of
WDS licenses vs. RDi is even higher.

-mark

On 1/31/2018 1:48 PM, Jim Oberholtzer wrote:

What you are suggesting would take about $800/seat revenue out of
IBMs hands.

Also due to the changes (way back) in IBM's accounting that makes it
much harder to assign sales.

Let me take another tack: Have you advocated that Microsoft give a
full copy of Studio away (or add $100) for every user license on the
Server platform? Do you think they would consider that? I know the
answer, hell no. So why should IBM do that?


--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects


-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
mlazarus
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:35 PM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client
for System i& iSeries<wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Software fixes for older releases

Hi Jim,

The main argument being put forth is a very old argument and
doesn't apply anymore. Let's look at the situation then and now.

Then:
- PC's were underpowered at that time for the product to work well.
- Midrange shops tend to be conservative about trying new software
products until they are tried and true and have gained traction in
the

community.

- Few midrange programmers were familiar with graphical IDE's.

Now:
- PC's have come a long way. No problem with CPU power or RAM
running

RDi.

- RDi has been tested in the field. and the features are far better
than
CODE/400 was.
- Many more programmers are familiar with graphical IDE's or at the
very least are will to try RDi.

When I refer to "bundling" it, IBM does not have to take a revenue hit.
If the price for WDS were to be raised very slightly for all when
purchasing the box, the powers that be would not blink to shell out
the extra $100 or so. For the programming staff to request it later,
or if it's a separate line item, it will often encounter resistance.

This opinion reflects my experience in several shops over quite a
few years.

-mark

On 1/31/2018 8:54 AM, Jim Oberholtzer wrote:


That was the argument for WSCDi back in the day. Bundle it and they
will use it. Very few of us did. Now that RDi has its own revenue
stream, development on the product has increased exponentially and
along with it, usage.

RDi has a model that is roughly based on the system with concurrent
user pricing if you purchase the correct license. If that works for
you go for it. It does not work for most shops.

My main thing is system programming so I remain in CL 90% of the
time with the balance being in SQL (and I do it badly I might add).
Most of my RPG is from code published in articles (thanks Scott and
Carsten!) so I don't do much there. I started using Code/400 and
it's


successors a long time ago.


I still use RDi (and pay for it) because even for the little bit
(comparatively to all of you) that I do, it's far more productive
than


SEU.


In the end it's about revenue to IBM. In order for the product to


survive,


it needs money. I don't disagree with the Lite version, but earlier
comments have hit the nail on the head. If 80% of what I use is in
the Lite version, why buy the full version? I'll just find another
way to do the 20% I don't get. That equals significant revenue loss
for IBM and a reduction in the development pace. Now that IBM
outsourced the development to Help Systems I wait to find out how
that


will work, and what happens to pricing.


I'm not optimistic.


--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects


-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
mlazarus
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 9:07 PM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client
for System i& iSeries<wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Software fixes for older releases

Jim,

That's why I mentioned bundling it with the development tools.
That's licensed to the system, not by user. The number of installs
(probably the vast majority of systems sold) would more than pay for
RDi development and support.

-mark

On 1/30/2018 12:45 PM, Jim Oberholtzer wrote:



Mark,

I understand the sentiment, however that ship sailed a long time ago.
Each of the IBM products has to stand on its own financially now,
so bundling the RDi into the complier would not fit the new
economic model. I would not look for IBM to move that direction ever again.

Furthermore assuming P level tiered pricing, the P10 compiler
(most of the machines out there) is user based now, so let's say
IBM does bundle the RDi in with the compiler. Many of you (maybe
most) have a compiler license for
3 to 5 compilers, meaning concurrent compile operations. RDi would
bump the cost way too high since now you have to buy a compiler
license



for each



developer, instead of all of them sharing a small number of them.


Even


if IBM splits the difference with you and charges $500 for the RDi
and then the extra cost of the compiler (ILE btw, the OPM compiler
would be much
more) would become very prohibitive.

Remember IBM does not make much money on the hardware. It's now
all the software where the revenue is.

--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects


-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
mlazarus
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 11:14 AM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client
for System i& iSeries<wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Software fixes for older releases

Jim, Brian,

I would much rather that IBM nominally bumps the compiler or
WDS bundle price (maybe by $100?) for everyone and includes RDi as
part of either of those (most likely it would be WDS).

-mark

On 1/30/2018 9:43 AM, Jim Oberholtzer wrote:




Just to play devil's advocate for a moment:

There are at least two great open source editors out there. Orion
which is free (5733-OPS) and Liam Allan has published his version
called




ILEditor.




See: http://worksofbarry.com/ileditor

So now the question: Do you want IBM spending time/money on a
lite version of RDi, taking away resources from the full RDi
product, or would you like them to concentrate solely on the full
RDi product and allow the open source community to develop your lite versions?

I vote open source.

--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects


-----Original Message-----
From: WDSCI-L [mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Brian Parkins
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 7:54 AM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client
for System i& iSeries<wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Software fixes for older releases







There is an request (RFE) for an RDi-Lite version which would be
free or at least much cheaper. It's status is currently "Under
Consideration." So at least IBM is thinking about it.

You can add your vote at:

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe&CR
_
I
D
=
1
08558

developerWorks requires an IBM ID for which registration is free.

Michael Quigley
Computer Services
The Way International





Thx for highlighting this RFE - it has my vote!

Brian.


--
This is the Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client for System i & iSeries (WDSCI-L) mailing list To post a message email: WDSCI-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at https://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.