Lately, we've heard from several sources that attendance at courses,and interest in books, conference sessions, etc., on Remote System Explorer (RSE) may be waning a bit. Previously, we were thrilled to see what had been a growing trend to move away from editing code the old-fashioned SEU way to using RSE. So we're now wondering what may be behind this recent dip in RSE interest.
Could it be that most everyone has already made the switch and so RSE is now an "old hat" topic? It would be nice to think so, but sadly we're pretty certain this isn't the case.
Could it be because IBM Rational has introduced the chargeable RDi version of RSE? We suspect so and have seen some evidence of that. Many people have told us lately that they have to stick with SEU because RSE isn't free anymore and their companies won't pay.
Just to clarify things on the fee vs. free scenario--if you still have the WDSC V7 install disks around the shop somewhere, you can still install RSE and it will work even if your host is running 6.1. And it's still supported by IBM until April 2010. By that time, you'll be so much more productive that your management will be happy to shell out for the price of RDi (we can dream, can't we?).
Of course, it's not like most of us have ever shied away from using IBM products long past their IBM support window (how many pre-V5R4 systems are still out there?). And it's also entirely possible the pricing Ts & Cs will change again, hopefully for the better. We've written a previous iDevelop blog entry about using WDSC as your "free trial" to RDi, even for an extended period of time.
The fact that companies won't pay the relatively low price of RDi to improve the productivity of their developers is a sad statement as well, but that's a story for another post.
Could it be that the economy is to blame here and there isn't really any more drop in interest for RSE than for any other topic? After all, RSE is still on the agenda of every private class we teach--either the basics for those shops that haven't made the switch yet or a more advanced hints and tips level for those who are beyond the basics. In these days of slashed education budgets and many just trying to hold on to their jobs, perhaps learning a new way of working has simply taken a back seat.
What do you think? Is it one of these reasons or something else entirely?
Just curious: To what extent is Eclipse's reputation for being a resource hog hampering adoption of RSE? (Googling on "eclipse hog" returns 845,000 results!)
Sure, almost all machines sold these days have the resources to run Eclipse comfortably. But are lots of shops still hobbled with older machines incapable of running RSE?
Posted by: Hans Boldt | June 30, 2009 at 11:53 AM
I thought the SEU was the same price under 6.1 as the RDi?
Posted by: Patti Pulver | June 30, 2009 at 12:08 PM
"I thought the SEU was the same price under 6.1 as the RDi?"
That's right, Patti, if you're buying a new system. But most of the developers we talk to already have a system and when they upgrade to 6.1, they get a number of licenses to SEU (actually ADTS, which includes SEU) as part of what IBM calls "entitlement," assuming the shop is on SW maintenance.
Entitlement to ADTS/SEU covers all the developers in many shops. RDi is a new product so there is no entitlement for it. So the net of it is that they have access to SEU for free and if they want to use RDi, it costs extra.
There is a program whereby a developer can choose to give up his license of ADTS/SEU for a discounted price for RDi, but there are 2 problems with that.
First, it's still some cost vs. no cost. Second, it means giving up your license to all of ADTS, not just SEU. So no PDM, DFU, SDA, etc. Many developers, including me, are not willing/able to give that up for a discounted RDi. I'd rather pay full price for RDi (it's not that expensive in the grand scheme of things) and have the option to use PDM for those things where I find it works better than RDi. (Note - I said use PDM, not SEU!)
Susan Gantner
Posted by: Susan Gantner | June 30, 2009 at 04:14 PM
Hans,
"Just curious: To what extent is Eclipse's reputation for being a resource hog hampering adoption of RSE?"
I don't think it has any bearing on it whatsoever.
You figures sounded awful high to me so I Google'd away. Many of the hits I saw were very "old" so I limited the search to the last 12 months - which seemed a more realistic query to me. Guess what - only 13,700 results if you do that. Interestingly many of them while noting that it is a resource hog are not complaining as such - they also frequently note things to the effect of "like everything else these days" or similar.
Also - for it to matter - people considering using the tool would have to know that Eclipse was involved. They don't, and really there's no reason why they should. It's an IBM product - just as when buying a Honda you don't pay much attention to who made the tires so it is with IBM tooling. _After_ they have installed it they might notice but most don't know. So they would never do the kind of Google search you did.
Second - even V7 of WDSC allowed for a "lite" install which was just two CDs and runs pretty well (apart for loading) even on old P4 hardware with 512Mb or so of memory. RAM is so cheap these days that I've seen folks who couldn't get the company tyo buy memory take their of 1Gb or 512Mb sticks into the office and plug them in!
Third - RDi even at 7.5 is faster than WDSC 7 and the subsequent releases should be faster.
Fourth - I use a number of Eclipse based tools and I don't see any significant performance issues - I'd like start-up to be faster but ... hey - it's Java based and offers great flexibility.
Last but not least - if IBM weren't building on Eclipse we wouldn't be getting this tooling at all I suspect - and IBM sure as heck aren't going to build it as an MS studio plug-in now are they ;-)
Posted by: Jon Paris | June 30, 2009 at 04:31 PM
A couple thoughts...
1) I run WDSC in a virtual instance of WindowsXP Pro with 768MB of memory and it performs well. If I want it to perform better then I up the virtual memory to 1 GB. When I up the memory I see a noticeable difference in the time it takes to do things like Service Entry Points. But per Jon's point, memory is a non-issue because if your company wont pay for it then you as a developer should have enough gumption (and money in your salary) to go out and spend $100 for a couple sticks of memory to get you up to 2 GB.
2) IBM seems to care a lot about the big customers that don't mind paying $800/seat for RDi. What they don't realize is that popularity weighs A LOT in todays market for programming languages and environments. The cost of entry has a HUGE direct correlation to adoption. Look no further than things like RubyOnRails and PHP. So easy to get your hands on the stuff for the entry level development and then companies, like Zend, make money on offering you enterprise level features. That is one of the reasons I think PHP will far outlive EGL on the IBM i even though IBM owns EGL.
3) The sessions I give on WDSC at the various trade shows and user groups are usually the best attended of all the sessions I give (and usually the ones where I get the most people to stay awake! LOL!). Having IBM now charge for RDi makes it harder for me to "sell" it to RPG programmers. I will forever continue to ask the people at Rational to give each shop one free copy of RDi so they can know what they are missing out on and can check it out whenever they want and for how ever long them want (i.e. no trial expiration). I have started to include a slide in my WDSC presentations that declares RPG Next Gen (www.rpgnextgen.com) as an alternative to WDSC/RDi. It doesn't have near the features, but it is making solid improvements since I first started using it about 1yr ago.
Aaron Bartell
p.s. I am shaving hair on my body. Find out why at http://firstgiving.com/aaronbartell
Posted by: Aaron Bartell | July 01, 2009 at 07:18 AM
Jon: You wrote: "I don't think it has any bearing on it whatsoever."
If that's all you'd written, I'd be satisfied. But after reading on, I suspect a) that you didn't answer my question, and b) that I hit a sore point with you. If the latter is true, I apologize for belaboring the point. But...
I played with RSE when it was young. Back when I was in RPG development, I occasionally did some testing on RSE. As a result, I was able to request what was at the time a pretty high-powered machine, well above the standard issue workstation. That machine served me well through my time on PL/X, up until I left the company.
My point is that back in the early days of RSE, it did have some pretty hefty resource requirements that did not escape the notice of the iSeries community. At the time, as I'm sure you know, many iSeries developers just couldn't justify the expense of upgrading their workstations just to run RSE.
My question is this: Is this early "resource hog" reputation still affecting current RSE adoption?
But to get on to another angle, another common criticism of RSE (and I suppose Eclipse in general) is its hefty learning curve. Sure, if it's presented in a classroom environment, people can certainly see its advantages and understand how to use it effectively. But what about people learning it without that benefit? Do you meet many iSeries developers who can learn it cold without the aid of a teacher or mentor?
Cheers! Hans
Posted by: Hans Boldt | July 02, 2009 at 02:17 PM
I wish this thing had a decent quoting mechanism ...
I really thought I _had_ answered Hans. In order for it to have any impact this "reputation" would have to have had wide currency in the 400 community and I do not believe that it did. That is the point I was trying to make.
"My point is that back in the early days of RSE, it did have some pretty hefty resource requirements that did not escape the notice of the iSeries community."
I thought I'd acknowledged and addressed that point. It was indeed a resource hog. No argument. And it was "noticed" but not by the larger community - only by the minority that hang out on internet forums and although that number has grown over the years, it is still a tiny percentage of the total community. Also if you go back to the web postings of the era, I think you'll find that as many people were saying "what the heck - everything needs a CPU/memory like that these days - it's worth it". I suspect that you are/were comparing with Unix/Linux software - not the bloated MS stuff that most of us are/were using.
"My question is this: Is this early "resource hog" reputation still affecting current RSE adoption?"
And my answer remains the same - to affect it people would have to be aware of this "reputation" and I don't think most are. Those who are aware - well they will also know of the vast improvements in Eclipse and the fact that RDi is not layered on top of other IBM tooling these days and therefore doesn't carry the overheads it used to.
"But to get on to another angle, another common criticism of RSE (and I suppose Eclipse in general) is its hefty learning curve."
I don't personally think it is any steeper for straight RPG development than any other tool. Do you recall the number of people who complained that PDM was too difficult to learn when it first came out? Even today some are using the S/38 programmers menu!!
Certainly hands-on training helps a lot. But there are many good books and articles etc. Don and Nazmin's book is a great resource for example. I suspect that today's PC savvy programmers would find SEU a hell of a lot harder to learn than WDSC/RDi.
It is not as easy as I would like it to be - but most self-taught folks that I know figure they were as productive as with SEU in a week or so and just got better and better after that.
If you really want to look at a reason for a slow down in adoption rates you can thank your former employer's decision to start charging for the stuff! Now _that_ really has slowed things down.
Posted by: Jon Paris | July 06, 2009 at 09:34 AM
To comment on Hans' question concerning if Eclipse in general is hard to learn - that completely depends on the person. In many cases an RPG developer hasn't been exposed to a variety of different development tools so it will take them longer to become efficient than, say, a PHP programmer.
Switching over to a tool that has a lot of the same features, just done in a different way, takes time to learn. For example, in PDM there is a way to create custom compile commands with two character codes that you put beside a member. I rarely used that approach because I couldn't ever remember which letter to couple with the correct ampersand for replacement values and sometimes I came across locking or authority limitations with QGPL/QAUOOPT and that caused me to just give up on that approach. Then I learned how to do it in WDSC and fell in love with it. I had clearly defined names (i.e. "CRTBNDRPG CGILIVE V5R1") that told me exactly how my compile was going to run.
Some things in WDSC/RDi are inherent because of Eclipse so the Rational team gets to play by their rules. But once you learn the thought process behind Eclipse you can see that it is a decent framework for IDE's.
I am also pretty jaded that IBM has taken the approach they have with the new licensing. I don't mind that they charge for it but I am mad that they don't give RPG developers an easier way to make RDi the defacto standard for tools in their shop. IMO they should give each shop that owns a compiler a single free copy of RDi so somebody on each company development team can become an evangelist for IBM's tooling without having to beg/plead for a license in the first place.
I am rambling now...
Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
Posted by: Aaron Bartell | July 06, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Personally, I found WDSc extremely easy to learn but that might be a generational thing (no offense). For me, WDSc is the best thing since PC emulation.
Posted by: jtaylor | July 06, 2009 at 03:33 PM
I personally dislike RSE because it encourages (or at least makes it too easy for) developers to edit code that is in production. It is much safer for me and my company to make changes in a sandbox and then test and promote them as an atomic unit into production.
I wish IBM would have put the time, effort, and money it spent on RSE into the 'iSeries Projects' feature. Having a discrete project to work with helps all of our developers become better developers.
Posted by: Brandon W | July 10, 2009 at 03:58 PM
"I personally dislike RSE because it encourages (or at least makes it too easy for) developers to edit code that is in production."
Sorry Brandon - but I just don't understand what you mean here. In what way does RSE make this any easier than SEU? The only difference is that you have to work harder in SEU to page down to the file to be edited.
Frankly if you have problems with people editing code in production then you have bigger management control issues than any tool can handle.
I use projects a lot, but not as a substitute for a decent source code management package. I use it so I can easily work with code while on the road.
Subversion works with RSE and is free. maybe if your shop won't pay for a commercial package you could use that to deal with your issues.
Posted by: Jon Paris | July 19, 2009 at 03:53 PM