That subject line should get your attention. <g>

I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!

As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.

What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future. 

Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
hear others.)

What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago? 

I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
to start that change now. 

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

I would like to see native PowerBuilder component support in other
application servers such as WebSphere.

Right now the biggest thing I hear when I suggest PB components is "We don't
want to be tied to EA Server".

PB generating Java would be nice, but I am afraid that would be full of bugs
and nuances that may not be worth while.


"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>
> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>
> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>
> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>
> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> hear others.)
>
> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>
> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> to start that change now.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

Dave Fish [Team Sybase] wrote: 

>Do you want it to generate Java? 
No.

>Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET? 
No.

>Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
easier? 
No.

>Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume
them) or does that not interest you in the least?
No.

>Do you think it should focus more on features for client server applications? 
Yes, but first make the damn thing USABLE! Send all the high-tech geeks on a
well deserved cruise and bring in a team of usability experts to perform
disaster control. Before the geeks return set all their home pages to "The
Interface Hall of Shame" ( http://www.iarchitect.com/shame.htm ). 

Sorry, this isn't exactly bringing the discussion up to a higher level, is it?
Bill Norton
Austin, TX

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:36:30 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
<daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:

>I would like to see native PowerBuilder component support in other
>application servers such as WebSphere.
>
But doesn't that application server vendor have to provide some sort
of support for running the PB VM? Sybase can only do so much. If IBM
doesn't allow you to call PB components (or initialize the PBVM from
WebSphere like EAServer does now) how would it be workable? 

>Right now the biggest thing I hear when I suggest PB components is "We don't
>want to be tied to EA Server".
>
>PB generating Java would be nice, but I am afraid that would be full of bugs
>and nuances that may not be worth while.

I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't want to see the issues that arose
when they added compiled (C++ code) happen again.

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

>
>
>"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
>> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>>
>> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
>> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>>
>> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
>> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
>> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
>> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
>> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>>
>> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
>> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
>> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
>> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>>
>> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
>> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
>> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
>> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
>> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
>> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
>> hear others.)
>>
>> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
>> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>>
>> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
>> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
>> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
>> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
>> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
>> to start that change now.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>>
>
>

>>Do you think it should focus more on features for client server applications? 
>Yes, but first make the damn thing USABLE! Send all the high-tech geeks on a
>well deserved cruise and bring in a team of usability experts to perform
>disaster control. Before the geeks return set all their home pages to "The
>Interface Hall of Shame" ( http://www.iarchitect.com/shame.htm ). 
>
Without causing this thread to degenerate into another enhancements
list, why do you think it is unusable? 

>Sorry, this isn't exactly bringing the discussion up to a higher level, is it?

No, but if you intend to (and want to) continue to be a PB developer
then we need to listen to your complaints and respond where we can. 

Do others agree with Bill's comments? In your opinion Is PB unusable?
Does it have a horrible interface?

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

Bill - Can I ask what exactly you're referring to when you say make 'the
damn thing useable?'  Are you talking about PB in general? If that's the
case, I'm sorry but I don't agree..Could you give an example please?  Thanks

----
Dave,

I'm still a newbie at all this and there are thing in PB that could be
better, but I'm not sure on something.  Is Sybase pulling away from
client-server to catch up to what everyone else is doing?

Thanks

--
Evita R. Chapa
Senior Systems Analyst
Command Technlogies, Inc

"Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:43kBKYeyBHA.206@forums.sybase.com...
> Dave Fish [Team Sybase] wrote:
>
> >Do you want it to generate Java?
> No.
>
> >Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
> No.
>
> >Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
> easier?
> No.
>
> >Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or
consume
> them) or does that not interest you in the least?
> No.
>
> >Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
applications?
> Yes, but first make the damn thing USABLE! Send all the high-tech geeks on
a
> well deserved cruise and bring in a team of usability experts to perform
> disaster control. Before the geeks return set all their home pages to "The
> Interface Hall of Shame" ( http://www.iarchitect.com/shame.htm ).
>
> Sorry, this isn't exactly bringing the discussion up to a higher level, is
it?
> Bill Norton
> Austin, TX

>Dave,
>
>I'm still a newbie at all this and there are thing in PB that could be
>better, but I'm not sure on something.  Is Sybase pulling away from
>client-server to catch up to what everyone else is doing?
>

No not at all. Sybase recognizes that there is still a big demand out
their for a client server development tool. I also think that PB's web
and n-tier support is pretty solid (especially what is planned for PB
9). I can't think of many other tools out there that let you do what
PB does in one package. 

We know what the analyst are saying PB should do. Product management
has ideas on where PB should go based on industry trends, etc. but I
want to hear what the people at the coal-face so to speak want. 

Resources are limited. I'd hate to see Sybase devote a lot of
resources (time & money) to a feature that developers have little
interest in. 

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

My honest opinion:

PB should stick to being a client-side development tool.  If I want to have
a partitioned app with different tiers I may want to use PowerBuilder on the
client side but I don't think I would ever choose PowerBuilder for the
server side.  I don't think the PowerBuilder language will ever become a
serious contender on the server.  It can't compete against Java, C++, .Net.

One of the things I think is looong overdue and I heard was finally coming
about in 9 is the ability for PB to interact with app servers other than
EAServer.  I think Sybase should go about making PB work as seemlessly as
possible with EAServer, WebSphere, WebLogic, .Net.  I want these connections
to work like database connections do (for the most part).  That is I want to
be able to write my clientside code without concern about what the backend
is.

I think PB needs to focus more on GUI functionality.  Some people have said
that its not to hard to point out a PowerBuilder app.  Thats because PB is
not pretty.  I think PB needs to get pretty to compete on the clientside.
Modern visual functionality and GUI components.

The problem with all this is that the datawindow doesn't really fit in with
this.  I think the datawindow needs to be reworked so you can visually
design a datawindow with an object as a source.  This object would most
likely be a component on your server.  Once you partition your app, it seems
illogical that you should still be designing your datawindow against the
database.  If you are architecting correctly, the datawindow should be
designed by what the component is passing to the client, not the database.
IMO.

Do I want PB to generate Java?
No

Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
I have no idea what that is so No.

Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
applications?
Not necessarily client-server, but client-side Yes.

Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
easier?
No, there are a ton of better web development tools, why would I choose PB.

Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or
consume them) or does that not interest you in the least?
Generate, No.  Consume, Yes.

One last reason why I don't think PB can make it on the server is that it
can only work in EAServer.  Thats enough to assure me that it will never be
anything but a niche on the server.  Even if EAServer makes it big time, the
only people writting components for it will be old PB shops.

-chris

ps.  Ok one last last thing.  Java didn't make it to the client.  Thats
where I now see the gap.

p.p.s.  I also think someone should change the name.  I've always thought
PowerBuilder sounded dumb.  Changing the name might help in re-inventing it.
We could, of course, continue with the confusing Sybase name changing
paradigm.  For example, Adaptive Builder Enteprise or Enterprise Adaptive
Power.

"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>
> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>
> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>
> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>
> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> hear others.)
>
> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>
> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> to start that change now.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

>Do others agree with Bill's comments? In your opinion Is PB unusable?
>Does it have a horrible interface?

No.  It does not.

I have just come through two months of serious attention to VB.net and
though it is quite good and very slick, I would not say it is head shoulders
above PB in terms of useablitlity. Obviously, the datawindow is much nicer
in many respects, though, in my opinion, ADO.net is not as bad as it's made
out to be either.

It seems to me, however, that things are done in VB.net, seamlessly, that
require the PFC in PowerBuilder.  All of it's usefull ness not withstanding,
I have always felt like the PFC was a platform on top of a platform, and too
hard to learn.  For simple client/server things, the PFC put a level of
complexity into the mix that beginners just aren't going to use.

There!  I said it.  I used the "B" word.  But "beginner: is not a word to be
ashamed of.  It's like Rock and Roll and Clasical music.  Bobby Bare used to
sing, "bought me a guitar, put it in tune, learned how to play in a day or
so".  If you had to wait until you knew everything that classical artists
know to make music, there would be no Rock and Roll.  If you scare the
beginners away with unneeded complexity, they'll never learn to use your
tool.  I'm not saying cheapen the tool, or make it less robust, but get away
from, where ever possible, unneeded complexity.  VB and ASA make a great
combination for plain ole pure client server.  Sureley there's a way to sell
that and make the product profitable.

There is no good tool for Client/Server right now.  Perhaps Delphi, but I
worry about Borland's stability.  Perhaps PB, but unless something changes
how long can they keep producing the product.  Paradox and Access don't have
the horse power.  VS.net has left the client/server market for the time
being.  Right now, VB.net is a Web building tool.  MS will come back to
client/server soon enough, they'll be forced to,  but in the meantime there
is, in my opinion, room for a product like PB to capture the market that VB
6 has left behind.

>Do you think it should focus more on features for
>client server applications.

Yes.  Client Server.  Client Server.  If you can do the other, fine, but in
my opinion, for my needs, it all has to rest on good client server.

One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very big
corporations out of the newsgroups..

I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how it
seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed to be
like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We did very
little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
things.

Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.

Ok guys I gotta jump in here...

At the begining I too thought PFC was just too hard.  We as a team made a
decision to use the PFC to its limits (vs trying to write everything
ourselves). I had heard trying to code your own resizing  for instance
wasn't fun.

I have to say after spending about 6 months with PFC, it's slowly getting
easier.  The pfc examples app has really come in handy.  Our team leader has
so far been able to take an example he can use, manipulate a few things and
it's off and running.  Sure, you gotta dig in it to find out what all the
behind the scenes stuff is doing.  Honestly folks, at the rate we're going,
we may end up being the poster children for PFC.  I think the hardest thing
to get used to first is how the PFC structured, then slowly once you learn
the structure, it gets easier to lookup things like the various services.

In comparison to VB, sure you have to work at it (I still read the PFC refs
quite a bit).  I agree that if you needed to write something in less than a
year, I'm sure PFC may not be your first choice.  Ours is a multi-year thing
so this first year for us to get our templates in order, environment, SCC
procedures, etc.

Now correct me if I'm wrong but I think in VB when you're viewing the
events, I think they're shown in event order?    Does PB have a way to show
something like that?  That's always been tricky for me sometimes, what fires
when.

The interface isn't horrible..could use a tweaking here and there...

Ok.. off the soapbox  :-)
Evita
"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:xgl#7LfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> >Do others agree with Bill's comments? In your opinion Is PB unusable?
> >Does it have a horrible interface?
>
> No.  It does not.
>
> I have just come through two months of serious attention to VB.net and
> though it is quite good and very slick, I would not say it is head
shoulders
> above PB in terms of useablitlity. Obviously, the datawindow is much nicer
> in many respects, though, in my opinion, ADO.net is not as bad as it's
made
> out to be either.
>
> It seems to me, however, that things are done in VB.net, seamlessly, that
> require the PFC in PowerBuilder.  All of it's usefull ness not
withstanding,
> I have always felt like the PFC was a platform on top of a platform, and
too
> hard to learn.  For simple client/server things, the PFC put a level of
> complexity into the mix that beginners just aren't going to use.
>
> There!  I said it.  I used the "B" word.  But "beginner: is not a word to
be
> ashamed of.  It's like Rock and Roll and Clasical music.  Bobby Bare used
to
> sing, "bought me a guitar, put it in tune, learned how to play in a day or
> so".  If you had to wait until you knew everything that classical artists
> know to make music, there would be no Rock and Roll.  If you scare the
> beginners away with unneeded complexity, they'll never learn to use your
> tool.  I'm not saying cheapen the tool, or make it less robust, but get
away
> from, where ever possible, unneeded complexity.  VB and ASA make a great
> combination for plain ole pure client server.  Sureley there's a way to
sell
> that and make the product profitable.
>
> There is no good tool for Client/Server right now.  Perhaps Delphi, but I
> worry about Borland's stability.  Perhaps PB, but unless something changes
> how long can they keep producing the product.  Paradox and Access don't
have
> the horse power.  VS.net has left the client/server market for the time
> being.  Right now, VB.net is a Web building tool.  MS will come back to
> client/server soon enough, they'll be forced to,  but in the meantime
there
> is, in my opinion, room for a product like PB to capture the market that
VB
> 6 has left behind.
>
>
>
>

Hope by responding as I do that you feel alright about it.  Your opinion is
as valid as mine.  That said..

What happens if a year from now you have to replace a man in your project.
One of the selling points of the PFC was that you could get everyone to do
things the same way.  Good idea, but, my understanding is that only and 30%
or less of the PB community know the PFC.  It's hard enough to find a PB
person.  What about a PFC, PB person?

>Do you want it to generate Java?
No, unless you can explain how that helps me.

>Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
No, unless you can explain how that helps me.

>Do you think it should focus more on features for
>client server applications?
Yes.  I think the other posts speak for themselves.

>Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
easier?
Well, maybe, if we can get a pricing model that makes sense for us.  We never
even looked at EAServer because we sell our package at a price so low that the
EAServer cost would literally eat up most of the profits.

PB web apps are tied to EAServer, which is OK if we can sell our package and
make money.  If we can't do that, it doesn't matter how good it is.  We are
still using Active Server Pages for our web package, and you get what you pay
for.

What I'd really like is the power to develop a *huge* web application with a RAD
tool.  Just like developing Client Server is with PowerBuilder -- you just can't
beat the programmer productivity!

I don't like *any* web development tool on the market today.  Active Server
Pages is way slower to develop than PB.  And, it's hard to maintain too.  I
still use Notepad primarily, and I'll bet that's true for many.  Seems to me,
most ASP applications are pretty small.  We want to port our whole application
to the web, but that's a "bet the company" proposal.

For now, I feel comfortable betting the company on Client Server and Sybase's
PowerBuilder.  But truthfully, the 8.0 user interface still could use some work.
Although it has improved in many ways (multiple DB connections, Workspaces,
etc), there is still some polishing needed.  But bottom line, I'm more
productive there than in any other tool I've seen (and I shop!)

And, for people who really have to have everything on the intranet, we are
successfully using Terminal Services and Citrix.  That has let us buy time
before doing a huge rewrite to the web.

Trends change.  A few years ago, some wanted our application to be written
entirely in Java.  Now some want everything on the web, and to have a Unix-based
application server.  Oh, and by the way, it has to connect to our standard
database, whatever that is now.

We can't rewrite our package every time a trend changes.  It's just too big.
The cost to re-write and test, then write a new manual is too high.  We have to
keep going with Client Server.  And Client-Server has a much better user
interface than most web applications anyway.  And, it works!

To thrive and regain glory?  I think the answers are right here in the user
group.  The main answer is Marketing.  You have to get this tool into the hands
of students and teachers.  You have to build courses and/or books and make them
available to people who aren't devoting their entire lives to PB (in other
words, to people who aren't CPI's.)

Wine and dine your remaining PowerBuilder User Group presidents.  These people
work *so* hard and are your greatest fans.  Help user groups, even finance them
and set up a rotation system so you don't have just one person doing all the
work.  Maybe monthly meetings don't make sense any more, so set up new groups
with three meetings a year (offset from the annual Tech Wave).

I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so* helpful on the
newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one join?

I spend many years teaching at UC Irvine and running the Orange County PB User
Group, and did get some support from Sybase.  More would have been better.

Give people a reason to be a user group president.  Put a link to the user
groups on your home page, not buried 5 levels down.  Post a picture of the
person, link to their home page, glorify these people.

Another big issue is to meet people's rising expectations.  People are OK with
PB being a Client-Server tool.  But, they are no longer happy with working
around "beginner bugs".  The two which must be squashed are: Compiler must
include all objects into EXE, and when adding a new column to an updatable
datawindow, the new column should be updatable.

Beginners need to have a good "out of the box experience".  One of PB's
strengths has always been that its Sample Application was far superior to VB.
Well, that Sample App has hardly changed in a long time.  Time for an update.
It needs 2 killers applications: Screen Customization, and the Rich Text column
which works with MS Word.

Finally, the DataWindow, which was the king control of all time, must be
modernized to meet today's higher expectations.  Grids in particular must be
improved, and there are many little suggestions.

One more thing.  I think Sybase is too fond of "big features", to the detriment
of "little features".  Compiling to JAVA is viewed as a "big feature" --
something sellable.  I would rather have 30 "little features" -- such as
improving the Find, than one "big feature".

Just my humble opinion.

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

And there is the rub.  I agree that if the vendor doesn't want you to, then
you're SOL.  I guess that is where some slick corporate to corporate
marketing needs to be done.  Maybe playing the "we'll all get crushed by the
Microsoft monoply" card?


"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e325a.11398129@199.93.177.77...
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:36:30 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
> <daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> >I would like to see native PowerBuilder component support in other
> >application servers such as WebSphere.
> >
> But doesn't that application server vendor have to provide some sort
> of support for running the PB VM? Sybase can only do so much. If IBM
> doesn't allow you to call PB components (or initialize the PBVM from
> WebSphere like EAServer does now) how would it be workable?
>
> >Right now the biggest thing I hear when I suggest PB components is "We
don't
> >want to be tied to EA Server".
> >
> >PB generating Java would be nice, but I am afraid that would be full of
bugs
> >and nuances that may not be worth while.
>
> I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't want to see the issues that arose
> when they added compiled (C++ code) happen again.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
> >
> >
> >"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> >news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> >> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> >>
> >> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> >> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> >>
> >> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> >> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> >> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> >> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> >> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> >>
> >> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> >> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> >> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> >> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> >>
> >> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> >> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> >> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> >> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> >> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> >> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> >> hear others.)
> >>
> >> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> >> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> >>
> >> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> >> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> >> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> >> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> >> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> >> to start that change now.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >>
> >
> >
>

Hey Woody,

Nope, don't mind a bit..That's what's cool around here - we agree to
disagree :-)

Whether we'd all use PFC or not, there's always gonna be a learning curve
for a new developer coming in.  In our case we started with none of us ever
touching PFC, 1 experienced in PB in general and another experienced
starting in PB6.  I and another knew zip. A newbie would at least 3 bodies
to ask instead of just the manuals.

PFC is really just a library of code Sybase wrote to give developers objects
they could use.  Look at VB - it's just components written by Microsoft to
give developers objects they can use.  How many actually try to figure out
what the listbox object(internally) does after plopping it on a form?  Set
some properties and you're done with it.  Like I said, I never said learning
PFC was a piece of cake (we were fortunate to get the time).  It would be
nice if maybe there was an easier to way to learn PFC, but that's another
story

Evita
"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:m#g#2efyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> Hope by responding as I do that you feel alright about it.  Your opinion
is
> as valid as mine.  That said..
>
> What happens if a year from now you have to replace a man in your project.
> One of the selling points of the PFC was that you could get everyone to do
> things the same way.  Good idea, but, my understanding is that only and
30%
> or less of the PB community know the PFC.  It's hard enough to find a PB
> person.  What about a PFC, PB person?
>
>
>
>

I respectively disagree here.  I was able to leverage my PB knowledge and
create a robust, multi functional web application in very short order - 3
months.  The power of the datawindow (actually, datastores) are amazing and
the ability to use them to create dynamic web pages tied to a database is a
huge advantage!

Like it or not (and 18 months ago I was in the "hate it a lot" camp), the
web (intranet) is a driving force in development.  A tool that only does
client/server is severely limiting it's market - something PB doesn't really
have room to do.  A tool that does both is a great selling point - buy this
tool because no matter what architecture you choose, it will work....

D


"Chris" <schtoo@schtoo.com> wrote in message
news:A1OLDJfyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> My honest opinion:
>
> PB should stick to being a client-side development tool.  If I want to
have
> a partitioned app with different tiers I may want to use PowerBuilder on
the
> client side but I don't think I would ever choose PowerBuilder for the
> server side.  I don't think the PowerBuilder language will ever become a
> serious contender on the server.  It can't compete against Java, C++,
..Net.
>
> One of the things I think is looong overdue and I heard was finally coming
> about in 9 is the ability for PB to interact with app servers other than
> EAServer.  I think Sybase should go about making PB work as seemlessly as
> possible with EAServer, WebSphere, WebLogic, .Net.  I want these
connections
> to work like database connections do (for the most part).  That is I want
to
> be able to write my clientside code without concern about what the backend
> is.
>
> I think PB needs to focus more on GUI functionality.  Some people have
said
> that its not to hard to point out a PowerBuilder app.  Thats because PB is
> not pretty.  I think PB needs to get pretty to compete on the clientside.
> Modern visual functionality and GUI components.
>
> The problem with all this is that the datawindow doesn't really fit in
with
> this.  I think the datawindow needs to be reworked so you can visually
> design a datawindow with an object as a source.  This object would most
> likely be a component on your server.  Once you partition your app, it
seems
> illogical that you should still be designing your datawindow against the
> database.  If you are architecting correctly, the datawindow should be
> designed by what the component is passing to the client, not the database.
> IMO.
>
> Do I want PB to generate Java?
> No
>
> Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
> I have no idea what that is so No.
>
> Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
> applications?
> Not necessarily client-server, but client-side Yes.
>
> Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
> easier?
> No, there are a ton of better web development tools, why would I choose
PB.
>
> Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or
> consume them) or does that not interest you in the least?
> Generate, No.  Consume, Yes.
>
> One last reason why I don't think PB can make it on the server is that it
> can only work in EAServer.  Thats enough to assure me that it will never
be
> anything but a niche on the server.  Even if EAServer makes it big time,
the
> only people writting components for it will be old PB shops.
>
> -chris
>
> ps.  Ok one last last thing.  Java didn't make it to the client.  Thats
> where I now see the gap.
>
> p.p.s.  I also think someone should change the name.  I've always thought
> PowerBuilder sounded dumb.  Changing the name might help in re-inventing
it.
> We could, of course, continue with the confusing Sybase name changing
> paradigm.  For example, Adaptive Builder Enteprise or Enterprise Adaptive
> Power.
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> >
> > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> >
> > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> >
> > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> >
> > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> > hear others.)
> >
> > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> >
> > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> > to start that change now.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
>
>

It would seem that the two are related, though.  If it's going to support
other app servers, it's going to have to compile to Java (or perhaps let
you script in Java).  I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for IBM or BEA to
support the PB VM, but if PB could create java objects, it should be the
end of the issue.

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:55:43 GMT,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Dave Fish [Team Sybase] <dfish@sybase.com> wrote: 
>On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:36:30 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
><daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:
>
>>I would like to see native PowerBuilder component support in other
>>application servers such as WebSphere.
>>
>But doesn't that application server vendor have to provide some sort
>of support for running the PB VM? Sybase can only do so much. If IBM
>doesn't allow you to call PB components (or initialize the PBVM from
>WebSphere like EAServer does now) how would it be workable? 
>
>>Right now the biggest thing I hear when I suggest PB components is "We don't
>>want to be tied to EA Server".
>>
>>PB generating Java would be nice, but I am afraid that would be full of bugs
>>and nuances that may not be worth while.
>
>I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't want to see the issues that arose
>when they added compiled (C++ code) happen again.
>
>Regards,
>Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
>>
>>
>>"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>>news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
>>> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>>>
>>> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
>>> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>>>
>>> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
>>> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
>>> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
>>> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
>>> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>>>
>>> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
>>> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
>>> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
>>> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>>>
>>> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
>>> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
>>> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
>>> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
>>> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
>>> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
>>> hear others.)
>>>
>>> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
>>> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>>>
>>> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
>>> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
>>> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
>>> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
>>> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
>>> to start that change now.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>>>
>>
>>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

What is involved with an app server supporting the VM?  (I ask this out of
complete ignorance).  Would it be a lot of work for IBM to interact with the
PBVM?  If Sybase supplied the VM to them, isn't it a just a bunch of CORBA
api calls to the VM? Or is that a huge over simplification?

D


"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:rxyYAofyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> It would seem that the two are related, though.  If it's going to support
> other app servers, it's going to have to compile to Java (or perhaps let
> you script in Java).  I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for IBM or BEA to
> support the PB VM, but if PB could create java objects, it should be the
> end of the issue.
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:55:43 GMT,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Dave Fish [Team Sybase] <dfish@sybase.com> wrote:
> >On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:36:30 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
> ><daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I would like to see native PowerBuilder component support in other
> >>application servers such as WebSphere.
> >>
> >But doesn't that application server vendor have to provide some sort
> >of support for running the PB VM? Sybase can only do so much. If IBM
> >doesn't allow you to call PB components (or initialize the PBVM from
> >WebSphere like EAServer does now) how would it be workable?
> >
> >>Right now the biggest thing I hear when I suggest PB components is "We
don't
> >>want to be tied to EA Server".
> >>
> >>PB generating Java would be nice, but I am afraid that would be full of
bugs
> >>and nuances that may not be worth while.
> >
> >I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't want to see the issues that arose
> >when they added compiled (C++ code) happen again.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> >>news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> >>> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> >>>
> >>> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> >>> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> >>>
> >>> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> >>> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> >>> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> >>> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> >>> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> >>>
> >>> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> >>> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> >>> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> >>> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> >>>
> >>> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> >>> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> >>> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> >>> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> >>> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> >>> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> >>> hear others.)
> >>>
> >>> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> >>> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> >>>
> >>> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> >>> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> >>> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> >>> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> >>> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> >>> to start that change now.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I must go along with Daniel. The application I work on is C/S with a rich
GUI for a vertical market. Most of the customers are medium sized
businesses, and management has decided that requiring them to license and
support an additional server is not a marketable option. Therefore, we will
be using the Oracle application server that goes with the database server,
and the Web front end is being done without PowerBuilder. To us, any web
features that require EAS are irrelevant.

I find it difficult to believe that it is impossible to write some sort of
plug-in that would allow PB components to live in any given application
server. The PBVM should already exist, since it needs to be available to
support EAS under multiple operating systems. *Real* programmers know that
"bits is bits" - there exists a way to implement any well defined data
manipulation. Notice that I didn't say the "way" would be easy or elegant
;-). Doesn't J2EE define the interfaces for a component that can run on any
compliant server?

Dave Fish [Team Sybase] wrote in message
<3c8e325a.11398129@199.93.177.77>...
>On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:36:30 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
><daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:
>
>>I would like to see native PowerBuilder component support in other
>>application servers such as WebSphere.
>>
>But doesn't that application server vendor have to provide some sort
>of support for running the PB VM? Sybase can only do so much. If IBM
>doesn't allow you to call PB components (or initialize the PBVM from
>WebSphere like EAServer does now) how would it be workable?
>
>>Right now the biggest thing I hear when I suggest PB components is "We
don't
>>want to be tied to EA Server".
>>
>>PB generating Java would be nice, but I am afraid that would be full of
bugs
>>and nuances that may not be worth while.
>
>I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't want to see the issues that arose
>when they added compiled (C++ code) happen again.
>
>Regards,
>Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
>>
>>
>>"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>>news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
>>> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>>>
>>> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
>>> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>>>
>>> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
>>> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
>>> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
>>> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
>>> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>>>
>>> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
>>> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
>>> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
>>> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>>>
>>> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
>>> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
>>> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
>>> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
>>> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
>>> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
>>> hear others.)
>>>
>>> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
>>> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>>>
>>> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
>>> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
>>> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
>>> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
>>> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
>>> to start that change now.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>>>
>>
>>
>

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 13:53:15 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote: 

>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so* helpful on
>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one join?

http://www.teamsybase.com



Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

>To thrive and regain glory?  I think the answers are right here in the user
>group.  The main answer is Marketing

I too think marketing is key but I would take a different tack.  You can't
even buy PowerBuilder in a regular computer store like CompUSA.  If it can
be bought at all it has to be special ordered.

Why not do adds in PC week.  The comman man, and mere mortals, have to know
about the product.  Sybase is so classy in other ways.  The tech support on
line is great and they are obviously so professional in other ways.  It's
just that there is zero name recognition with regard to PowerBuilder.  If
they would advertise it as the best client/server tool on the market, it
would be hard to refute.

There's nothing other than Borland right now that fills that nitch.  VB.net
can't be purchased with a report writer for less than $1,200.00.  Delphi is
easily purchased at most big computer stores.

By the way, tech support for how to make Crystal reports work with the
integrated VS.net environment is allmost nill.  There is no MS newsgroup for
this that is monitored by Crystal and only a few messages a day are passing
through Crystal's internal news group.  My understanding is that Crystal has
pretty good support if you are willing to pay (again a big corporation
thing) but if you want any support like we have on these newsgroup, good
luck.

A lot of good that does a developer who does not have a several thousand
dollar technical support budget.

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:09:20 GMT,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Dave Fish [Team Sybase] <dfish@sybase.com> wrote: 
>Do you want it to generate Java?

That would be important if we want to be supported by other app servers than
EAServer.  I can't help wondering if PowerJ shouldn't be used instead in those
situations though.  The one thing that VS.Net does is makes the choice of a
scripting language pretty much irrelevant.  Perhaps PowerJ and PowerBuilder
could be 'mergered' in such a way that we could choose to script in PowerScript
or in Java, and if we scripted in Java we could be supported by other app
servers.....

>Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?

That would certainly make things interesting, but would not be a major
selling point for me.

>Do you think it should focus more on features for client server applications?

As far as client/server goes, I'd like to see a lot of what is already
provided fixed up.  New RTF control, support for some of the newer Windows
GUI features, most of the other stuff mentioned in the other threads.

>Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
>easier?

Not a big issue.  I'm afraid my favorite web development tool is WordPad.
Everything else seems to get in the way more than help.

>Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or 
>consume them) or does that not interest you in the least?

Both are important for me.  However, PB should do for web services what the
datawindow did for client/server database interaction.  If I have to do a
whole lot of low-level stuff to make it work, I might as well be doing it
directly in java.

>What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
>thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago? 

Three things:  Marketing, marketing, and marketing.

Get some technical folks out in the field with the sales reps, and do some
hands-on, apples versus apples comparisions between PB and the competition.
Show people first hand why PB is a better product, don't just talk about it.


Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".  As far
as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.  Even
more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this case,
Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and newsletter.
The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be augmented
in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree are
almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations are
integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer - User.
Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses) read
day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has been
instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
corporate world.

My 2 cents.

-EGM

Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very big
> corporations out of the newsgroups..
>
> I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how it
> seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed to be
> like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We did
very
> little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
> things.
>
> Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.
>
>

I don't know.  I can't help but think that what killed the user groups was
well supported newsgroups.  What did you go to a user group for?  I went to
learn about new stuff, to interact with other developers, and for free pizza
and soda <g>.  It seems to me that the first two are being met here, and I
can participate as my own time schedule allows.  They could be augmented a bit,
I'd like to see online presentations that allow for question and answer
sesions (the online equivalent of the meeting presentations).  Not just from
the Sybase folks and the big corporations, and but the average Joe developer
with something to show as well.  Perhaps they could be recorded and made
available for later viewing.

But, aside from not being able to scarf down on free virtual pizza and soda,
what else are we missing?

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:36:16 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Edward Muesch <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote: 
>I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".  As far
>as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.  Even
>more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
>attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this case,
>Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
>providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and newsletter.
>The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be augmented
>in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree are
>almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations are
>integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer - User.
>Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
>footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses) read
>day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has been
>instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
>corporate world.
>
>My 2 cents.
>
>-EGM
>
>Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
>news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
>> One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very big
>> corporations out of the newsgroups..
>>
>> I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how it
>> seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed to be
>> like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We did
>very
>> little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
>> things.
>>
>> Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.
>>
>>
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I love the virtual world as much as anyone, but there's no substitute for
face-to-face.  Networking with people in your geographical area has it's
benefits as well.  There's nothing like an internal reference in the
corporation you're trying to land a contract in.  You can get this from
newsgroups too but the numbers make it a lot less likely.

And Sybase doesn't give away free stuff here either. <g>

-EGM

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase] <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:5QmbBjgyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> I don't know.  I can't help but think that what killed the user groups was
> well supported newsgroups.  What did you go to a user group for?  I went
to
> learn about new stuff, to interact with other developers, and for free
pizza
> and soda <g>.  It seems to me that the first two are being met here, and I
> can participate as my own time schedule allows.  They could be augmented a
bit,
> I'd like to see online presentations that allow for question and answer
> sesions (the online equivalent of the meeting presentations).  Not just
from
> the Sybase folks and the big corporations, and but the average Joe
developer
> with something to show as well.  Perhaps they could be recorded and made
> available for later viewing.
>
> But, aside from not being able to scarf down on free virtual pizza and
soda,
> what else are we missing?
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:36:16 -0500,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Edward Muesch <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".  As
far
> >as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.
Even
> >more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
> >attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this
case,
> >Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
> >providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and newsletter.
> >The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
augmented
> >in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree
are
> >almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations are
> >integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer - User.
> >Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
> >footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses)
read
> >day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has been
> >instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
> >corporate world.
> >
> >My 2 cents.
> >
> >-EGM
> >
> >Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> >news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> >> One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very
big
> >> corporations out of the newsgroups..
> >>
> >> I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how it
> >> seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed to
be
> >> like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We did
> >very
> >> little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
> >> things.
> >>
> >> Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

>I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups

Yes, that's what I meant.  Not newsgroups.

I understand what you're saying.  We're all in this for something and it's
not all out of the "goodness of our hearts".   But since what we're talking
about here are perceptions, to me Sybase seems to be all about Corporate
Corporate Corporate and Big Corporate at that.  If this had made this
product successful I would say continue it, but as yet, it hasn't.
Microsoft is obviously aware of corporations too but they think different
where marketing is concerned.  All that said, I think Sybase has a lot going
for them.  I'm "fer-em" not "agin-em".  They're very classy in their own
way, but very un-people oriented in their marketing.  Very corporate
oriented instead.

Just my .02 cents worth.




"Edward Muesch" <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XVfHqbgyBHA.322@forums.sybase.com...
> I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".  As
far
> as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.  Even
> more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
> attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this case,
> Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
> providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and newsletter.
> The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
augmented
> in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree
are
> almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations are
> integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer - User.
> Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
> footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses)
read
> day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has been
> instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
> corporate world.
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> -EGM
>
> Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> > One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very
big
> > corporations out of the newsgroups..
> >
> > I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how it
> > seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed to
be
> > like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We did
> very
> > little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
> > things.
> >
> > Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.
> >
> >
>
>

I most certainly do not agree that PB should stick to being client-side.
None of the languages you cite come close to being as productive for writing
database aware business components.  Of course, practically nobody outside
of the inner circle knows this, which is indeed a problem for the long-term
viability of the language.  If one could use the language to create
components on other app servers, and Sybase discovered marketing, it would
be dynamite.  But very, very big ifs, I admit.

Mark Maslow

"Chris" <schtoo@schtoo.com> wrote in message
news:A1OLDJfyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> My honest opinion:
>
> PB should stick to being a client-side development tool.  If I want to
have
> a partitioned app with different tiers I may want to use PowerBuilder on
the
> client side but I don't think I would ever choose PowerBuilder for the
> server side.  I don't think the PowerBuilder language will ever become a
> serious contender on the server.  It can't compete against Java, C++,
..Net.
>
> One of the things I think is looong overdue and I heard was finally coming
> about in 9 is the ability for PB to interact with app servers other than
> EAServer.  I think Sybase should go about making PB work as seemlessly as
> possible with EAServer, WebSphere, WebLogic, .Net.  I want these
connections
> to work like database connections do (for the most part).  That is I want
to
> be able to write my clientside code without concern about what the backend
> is.
>
> I think PB needs to focus more on GUI functionality.  Some people have
said
> that its not to hard to point out a PowerBuilder app.  Thats because PB is
> not pretty.  I think PB needs to get pretty to compete on the clientside.
> Modern visual functionality and GUI components.
>
> The problem with all this is that the datawindow doesn't really fit in
with
> this.  I think the datawindow needs to be reworked so you can visually
> design a datawindow with an object as a source.  This object would most
> likely be a component on your server.  Once you partition your app, it
seems
> illogical that you should still be designing your datawindow against the
> database.  If you are architecting correctly, the datawindow should be
> designed by what the component is passing to the client, not the database.
> IMO.
>
> Do I want PB to generate Java?
> No
>
> Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
> I have no idea what that is so No.
>
> Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
> applications?
> Not necessarily client-server, but client-side Yes.
>
> Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
> easier?
> No, there are a ton of better web development tools, why would I choose
PB.
>
> Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or
> consume them) or does that not interest you in the least?
> Generate, No.  Consume, Yes.
>
> One last reason why I don't think PB can make it on the server is that it
> can only work in EAServer.  Thats enough to assure me that it will never
be
> anything but a niche on the server.  Even if EAServer makes it big time,
the
> only people writting components for it will be old PB shops.
>
> -chris
>
> ps.  Ok one last last thing.  Java didn't make it to the client.  Thats
> where I now see the gap.
>
> p.p.s.  I also think someone should change the name.  I've always thought
> PowerBuilder sounded dumb.  Changing the name might help in re-inventing
it.
> We could, of course, continue with the confusing Sybase name changing
> paradigm.  For example, Adaptive Builder Enteprise or Enterprise Adaptive
> Power.
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> >
> > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> >
> > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> >
> > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> >
> > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> > hear others.)
> >
> > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> >
> > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> > to start that change now.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
>
>

I went to ... to interact with other developers,

That's the only reason I go to any user-group meeting.  That and to find out
who's doing what with the particular product in my market.  Maybe there will
be something that will generate some business for me.  Maybe I'll have
something to be of service to others.  maybe there will be others who can
help me or a client with something we're doing.  We all need to know who the
local players are.

I read a post a few days ago from Roy Kiesler that Raj Nathan said that .NET
support would be included in PowerBuilder 9.0.  I'm assuming that this is
certainly not happening since you're asking these sorts of questions now?

Secondly, I think the biggest area where PowerBuilder could fill a void is
by becoming THE client-side for J2EE applications.  I mean PowerBuilder has
always been about the DataWindow, and I frankly don't see how the
DataWindows fits in at all in a well architected multi-tier development
model.  I welcome someone to explain to me how I'm wrong on that one,
because that is currently an area of confusion for me since I don't use the
DataWindow.  But what I'm getting at is PowerBuilder needs a new niche.  I
personally see a void as far as tools to help easily develop traditional
graphical user interfaces for J2EE applications.  I'm a big fan of Java,
which is what I do a majority of my development in, but frankly I'm not a
fan of Java on the client.  If Sybase could provide a stellar environment
for building an UI that could talk to any J2EE application server I think
that might be an area where it could excel.  Sybase could do this as a .NET
language or as it is today with the PBVM.  I also think it is absolutely
critical that PowerBuilder continue to sport tight integration with
EAServer.  This is the ONLY migration path that PowerBuilder shops have to
take third client-server applications to the three-tier model.  If this
support goes away, those shops are going to be forced to simply recode
everything in a different environment and no one wants to do that.

Lastly, I think it is important that PowerBuilder continue to support the
traditional client-server development model.  Frankly, in many situations
n-tier is complete overkill.  If  you need to build a departmental
application with a traditional UI, then PowerBuilder does the job pretty
well.


"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>
> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>
> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>
> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>
> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> hear others.)
>
> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>
> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> to start that change now.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

I believe you mean to suggest that that was your .02 dollars worth <g>

Free PB Desktop with limited Web Datawindow.  Place limitations that
wouldn't stop the little guy but only prevent the Corporate client from
being able to use it.

Do this correctly and advertise the s--t out of it and revenue loss might
not even come to be, but watch the market share soar... slowly at first but
there is a history here, it's not a new product.  So the marketing model is
different and the market-share wouldn't just dry up once a price is placed
back on it.  The buzz would be enormous with Sybase lining the revenue
streams (through advertising) of those who could help with the "oh gee,
what's this?" crowd.

The real-world isn't pretty but it works!

-EGM

Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:bn8kS3gyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> >I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups
>
> Yes, that's what I meant.  Not newsgroups.
>
> I understand what you're saying.  We're all in this for something and it's
> not all out of the "goodness of our hearts".   But since what we're
talking
> about here are perceptions, to me Sybase seems to be all about Corporate
> Corporate Corporate and Big Corporate at that.  If this had made this
> product successful I would say continue it, but as yet, it hasn't.
> Microsoft is obviously aware of corporations too but they think different
> where marketing is concerned.  All that said, I think Sybase has a lot
going
> for them.  I'm "fer-em" not "agin-em".  They're very classy in their own
> way, but very un-people oriented in their marketing.  Very corporate
> oriented instead.
>
> Just my .02 cents worth.
>
>
>
>
> "Edward Muesch" <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:XVfHqbgyBHA.322@forums.sybase.com...
> > I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".  As
> far
> > as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.
Even
> > more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
> > attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this
case,
> > Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
> > providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and newsletter.
> > The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
> augmented
> > in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree
> are
> > almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations are
> > integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer -
User.
> > Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
> > footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses)
> read
> > day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has
been
> > instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
> > corporate world.
> >
> > My 2 cents.
> >
> > -EGM
> >
> > Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> > news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> > > One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very
> big
> > > corporations out of the newsgroups..
> > >
> > > I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how
it
> > > seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed
to
> be
> > > like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We
did
> > very
> > > little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
> > > things.
> > >
> > > Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

>Secondly, I think the biggest area where PowerBuilder could fill a void is
>by becoming THE client-side for J2EE applications

I may be out of my element on this but it seems to me that what dot net does
is completly change the plumbing.  They have created a new standard and it
appears to me they are going to be able to carry it off.  All of the major
players, including Sybase if I recall correctly, seem to be on board.

I also agree that sticking to client-side would be counter-productive.
Scalability is the word of the day and although most clients are just
considering web-enabling their current client/server apps the head
muckity-mucks are all asking "are we scalable" and if the answer is anything
but "yes" then the response is to get whatever the big-guy/gal heard being
discussed at the 19th hole the prior Wednesday afternoon.

-EGM

Mark Maslow <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org> wrote in message
news:sTRwF6gyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> I most certainly do not agree that PB should stick to being client-side.
> None of the languages you cite come close to being as productive for
writing
> database aware business components.  Of course, practically nobody outside
> of the inner circle knows this, which is indeed a problem for the
long-term
> viability of the language.  If one could use the language to create
> components on other app servers, and Sybase discovered marketing, it would
> be dynamite.  But very, very big ifs, I admit.
>
> Mark Maslow
>
> "Chris" <schtoo@schtoo.com> wrote in message
> news:A1OLDJfyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> > My honest opinion:
> >
> > PB should stick to being a client-side development tool.  If I want to
> have
> > a partitioned app with different tiers I may want to use PowerBuilder on
> the
> > client side but I don't think I would ever choose PowerBuilder for the
> > server side.  I don't think the PowerBuilder language will ever become a
> > serious contender on the server.  It can't compete against Java, C++,
> .Net.
> >
> > One of the things I think is looong overdue and I heard was finally
coming
> > about in 9 is the ability for PB to interact with app servers other than
> > EAServer.  I think Sybase should go about making PB work as seemlessly
as
> > possible with EAServer, WebSphere, WebLogic, .Net.  I want these
> connections
> > to work like database connections do (for the most part).  That is I
want
> to
> > be able to write my clientside code without concern about what the
backend
> > is.
> >
> > I think PB needs to focus more on GUI functionality.  Some people have
> said
> > that its not to hard to point out a PowerBuilder app.  Thats because PB
is
> > not pretty.  I think PB needs to get pretty to compete on the
clientside.
> > Modern visual functionality and GUI components.
> >
> > The problem with all this is that the datawindow doesn't really fit in
> with
> > this.  I think the datawindow needs to be reworked so you can visually
> > design a datawindow with an object as a source.  This object would most
> > likely be a component on your server.  Once you partition your app, it
> seems
> > illogical that you should still be designing your datawindow against the
> > database.  If you are architecting correctly, the datawindow should be
> > designed by what the component is passing to the client, not the
database.
> > IMO.
> >
> > Do I want PB to generate Java?
> > No
> >
> > Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
> > I have no idea what that is so No.
> >
> > Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
> > applications?
> > Not necessarily client-server, but client-side Yes.
> >
> > Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
> > easier?
> > No, there are a ton of better web development tools, why would I choose
> PB.
> >
> > Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or
> > consume them) or does that not interest you in the least?
> > Generate, No.  Consume, Yes.
> >
> > One last reason why I don't think PB can make it on the server is that
it
> > can only work in EAServer.  Thats enough to assure me that it will never
> be
> > anything but a niche on the server.  Even if EAServer makes it big time,
> the
> > only people writting components for it will be old PB shops.
> >
> > -chris
> >
> > ps.  Ok one last last thing.  Java didn't make it to the client.  Thats
> > where I now see the gap.
> >
> > p.p.s.  I also think someone should change the name.  I've always
thought
> > PowerBuilder sounded dumb.  Changing the name might help in re-inventing
> it.
> > We could, of course, continue with the confusing Sybase name changing
> > paradigm.  For example, Adaptive Builder Enteprise or Enterprise
Adaptive
> > Power.
> >
> > "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> > news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> > > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> > >
> > > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> > > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> > >
> > > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> > > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> > > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> > > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> > > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> > >
> > > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> > > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> > > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> > > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> > >
> > > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> > > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> > > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> > > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> > > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> > > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> > > hear others.)
> > >
> > > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> > > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> > >
> > > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> > > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> > > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> > > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> > > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> > > to start that change now.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Yes.  The trouble here is finding the right balance.  If you cripple it too
much, then you kind of defeat the purpose of doing it in the first place -
to get people accustomed to all it can do so when they go out in the real
world and have to use VB or some other tool they keep saying "let's use PB
because it can do this or that much faster".

I almost think you need to put your faith in an educational license
agreement that says "here's everything, when you leave school, you need to
buy it".

Or, maybe you could put a built in time bomb in executeables or PBDs as part
of the generation process?  It works for 6 months from the time you compile
it.  That would be long enough to get through any class project (if not you
could recompile it) but not long enough for someone to steal it and write an
application to sell - they would need to come out with a patch (rebuild)
every 6 months.


"Edward Muesch" <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:C#OKkJhyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> I believe you mean to suggest that that was your .02 dollars worth <g>
>
> Free PB Desktop with limited Web Datawindow.  Place limitations that
> wouldn't stop the little guy but only prevent the Corporate client from
> being able to use it.
>
> Do this correctly and advertise the s--t out of it and revenue loss might
> not even come to be, but watch the market share soar... slowly at first
but
> there is a history here, it's not a new product.  So the marketing model
is
> different and the market-share wouldn't just dry up once a price is placed
> back on it.  The buzz would be enormous with Sybase lining the revenue
> streams (through advertising) of those who could help with the "oh gee,
> what's this?" crowd.
>
> The real-world isn't pretty but it works!
>
> -EGM
>
> Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> news:bn8kS3gyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> > >I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups
> >
> > Yes, that's what I meant.  Not newsgroups.
> >
> > I understand what you're saying.  We're all in this for something and
it's
> > not all out of the "goodness of our hearts".   But since what we're
> talking
> > about here are perceptions, to me Sybase seems to be all about Corporate
> > Corporate Corporate and Big Corporate at that.  If this had made this
> > product successful I would say continue it, but as yet, it hasn't.
> > Microsoft is obviously aware of corporations too but they think
different
> > where marketing is concerned.  All that said, I think Sybase has a lot
> going
> > for them.  I'm "fer-em" not "agin-em".  They're very classy in their own
> > way, but very un-people oriented in their marketing.  Very corporate
> > oriented instead.
> >
> > Just my .02 cents worth.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Edward Muesch" <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:XVfHqbgyBHA.322@forums.sybase.com...
> > > I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".
As
> > far
> > > as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.
> Even
> > > more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
> > > attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this
> case,
> > > Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive
in
> > > providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and
newsletter.
> > > The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
> > augmented
> > > in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I
agree
> > are
> > > almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations
are
> > > integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer -
> User.
> > > Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the
PB
> > > footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our
bosses)
> > read
> > > day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has
> been
> > > instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
> > > corporate world.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents.
> > >
> > > -EGM
> > >
> > > Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> > > news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> > > > One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the
very
> > big
> > > > corporations out of the newsgroups..
> > > >
> > > > I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how
> it
> > > > seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed
> to
> > be
> > > > like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We
> did
> > > very
> > > > little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might
do
> > > > things.
> > > >
> > > > Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to
me.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

The only client-server apps being discussed in companies ALL have a
phase-two already being discussed and most (if not all) of those require
web, Web, WEB... and MS incorrectly implies that as being available
'out-of-the-box'.  Sybase needs to keep improving C/S but needs to fully
incorporate Web capability as much as is technically possible.

-EGM

Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:CW1p4MfyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> >Do you think it should focus more on features for
> >client server applications.
>
> Yes.  Client Server.  Client Server.  If you can do the other, fine, but
in
> my opinion, for my needs, it all has to rest on good client server.
>
>
>
>

Don't limit the Web DataWindow, limit the server that realizes it to a
one-connection developer's edition.
Give them out like AOL disks!

Edward Muesch wrote in message ...
>I believe you mean to suggest that that was your .02 dollars worth <g>
>
>Free PB Desktop with limited Web Datawindow.  Place limitations that
>wouldn't stop the little guy but only prevent the Corporate client from
>being able to use it.
>
>Do this correctly and advertise the s--t out of it and revenue loss might
>not even come to be, but watch the market share soar... slowly at first but
>there is a history here, it's not a new product.  So the marketing model is
>different and the market-share wouldn't just dry up once a price is placed
>back on it.  The buzz would be enormous with Sybase lining the revenue
>streams (through advertising) of those who could help with the "oh gee,
>what's this?" crowd.
>
>The real-world isn't pretty but it works!
>
>-EGM
>
>Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
>news:bn8kS3gyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
>> >I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups
>>
>> Yes, that's what I meant.  Not newsgroups.
>>
>> I understand what you're saying.  We're all in this for something and
it's
>> not all out of the "goodness of our hearts".   But since what we're
>talking
>> about here are perceptions, to me Sybase seems to be all about Corporate
>> Corporate Corporate and Big Corporate at that.  If this had made this
>> product successful I would say continue it, but as yet, it hasn't.
>> Microsoft is obviously aware of corporations too but they think different
>> where marketing is concerned.  All that said, I think Sybase has a lot
>going
>> for them.  I'm "fer-em" not "agin-em".  They're very classy in their own
>> way, but very un-people oriented in their marketing.  Very corporate
>> oriented instead.
>>
>> Just my .02 cents worth.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Edward Muesch" <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:XVfHqbgyBHA.322@forums.sybase.com...
>> > I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".
As
>> far
>> > as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.
>Even
>> > more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
>> > attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this
>case,
>> > Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
>> > providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and
newsletter.
>> > The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
>> augmented
>> > in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree
>> are
>> > almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations
are
>> > integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer -
>User.
>> > Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
>> > footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses)
>> read
>> > day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has
>been
>> > instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
>> > corporate world.
>> >
>> > My 2 cents.
>> >
>> > -EGM
>> >
>> > Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
>> > news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
>> > > One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very
>> big
>> > > corporations out of the newsgroups..
>> > >
>> > > I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how
>it
>> > > seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed
>to
>> be
>> > > like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We
>did
>> > very
>> > > little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
>> > > things.
>> > >
>> > > Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to
me.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

The power of monopoly.  The industry does not have a choice but to go along
with it.

Trouble is, Microsoft can change their standard at will.  Imagine if they
changed the way the CLR worked - they can change their tools and deploy the
day they announce the change and every other vendor (except those MS wants
to exist, i.e. the ones that threaten them the least) have months to catch
up and all the while MS gets to say "our tools are up to date and everyone
else is old"....





"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:jtkjDMhyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> >Secondly, I think the biggest area where PowerBuilder could fill a void
is
> >by becoming THE client-side for J2EE applications
>
> I may be out of my element on this but it seems to me that what dot net
does
> is completly change the plumbing.  They have created a new standard and it
> appears to me they are going to be able to carry it off.  All of the major
> players, including Sybase if I recall correctly, seem to be on board.
>
>
>
>
>

Every large shop has multiple technologies being used.  If you don't know
how compatibility and seamless (or at least simple) integration with Java
and .NET will help you, and thus can't explain it to your boss... then the
guy across the floor (probably using MS or Sun technology) will be more than
happy to.

-EGM

VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote in message
news:15OyqcfyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> >Do you want it to generate Java?
> No, unless you can explain how that helps me.
>
> >Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
> No, unless you can explain how that helps me.
>
> >Do you think it should focus more on features for
> >client server applications?
> Yes.  I think the other posts speak for themselves.
>
> >Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
> easier?
> Well, maybe, if we can get a pricing model that makes sense for us.  We
never
> even looked at EAServer because we sell our package at a price so low that
the
> EAServer cost would literally eat up most of the profits.
>
> PB web apps are tied to EAServer, which is OK if we can sell our package
and
> make money.  If we can't do that, it doesn't matter how good it is.  We
are
> still using Active Server Pages for our web package, and you get what you
pay
> for.
>
> What I'd really like is the power to develop a *huge* web application with
a RAD
> tool.  Just like developing Client Server is with PowerBuilder -- you just
can't
> beat the programmer productivity!
>
> I don't like *any* web development tool on the market today.  Active
Server
> Pages is way slower to develop than PB.  And, it's hard to maintain too.
I
> still use Notepad primarily, and I'll bet that's true for many.  Seems to
me,
> most ASP applications are pretty small.  We want to port our whole
application
> to the web, but that's a "bet the company" proposal.
>
> For now, I feel comfortable betting the company on Client Server and
Sybase's
> PowerBuilder.  But truthfully, the 8.0 user interface still could use some
work.
> Although it has improved in many ways (multiple DB connections,
Workspaces,
> etc), there is still some polishing needed.  But bottom line, I'm more
> productive there than in any other tool I've seen (and I shop!)
>
> And, for people who really have to have everything on the intranet, we are
> successfully using Terminal Services and Citrix.  That has let us buy time
> before doing a huge rewrite to the web.
>
> Trends change.  A few years ago, some wanted our application to be written
> entirely in Java.  Now some want everything on the web, and to have a
Unix-based
> application server.  Oh, and by the way, it has to connect to our standard
> database, whatever that is now.
>
> We can't rewrite our package every time a trend changes.  It's just too
big.
> The cost to re-write and test, then write a new manual is too high.  We
have to
> keep going with Client Server.  And Client-Server has a much better user
> interface than most web applications anyway.  And, it works!
>
> To thrive and regain glory?  I think the answers are right here in the
user
> group.  The main answer is Marketing.  You have to get this tool into the
hands
> of students and teachers.  You have to build courses and/or books and make
them
> available to people who aren't devoting their entire lives to PB (in other
> words, to people who aren't CPI's.)
>
> Wine and dine your remaining PowerBuilder User Group presidents.  These
people
> work *so* hard and are your greatest fans.  Help user groups, even finance
them
> and set up a rotation system so you don't have just one person doing all
the
> work.  Maybe monthly meetings don't make sense any more, so set up new
groups
> with three meetings a year (offset from the annual Tech Wave).
>
> I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so* helpful
on the
> newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one join?
>
> I spend many years teaching at UC Irvine and running the Orange County PB
User
> Group, and did get some support from Sybase.  More would have been better.
>
> Give people a reason to be a user group president.  Put a link to the user
> groups on your home page, not buried 5 levels down.  Post a picture of the
> person, link to their home page, glorify these people.
>
> Another big issue is to meet people's rising expectations.  People are OK
with
> PB being a Client-Server tool.  But, they are no longer happy with working
> around "beginner bugs".  The two which must be squashed are: Compiler must
> include all objects into EXE, and when adding a new column to an updatable
> datawindow, the new column should be updatable.
>
> Beginners need to have a good "out of the box experience".  One of PB's
> strengths has always been that its Sample Application was far superior to
VB.
> Well, that Sample App has hardly changed in a long time.  Time for an
update.
> It needs 2 killers applications: Screen Customization, and the Rich Text
column
> which works with MS Word.
>
> Finally, the DataWindow, which was the king control of all time, must be
> modernized to meet today's higher expectations.  Grids in particular must
be
> improved, and there are many little suggestions.
>
> One more thing.  I think Sybase is too fond of "big features", to the
detriment
> of "little features".  Compiling to JAVA is viewed as a "big feature" --
> something sellable.  I would rather have 30 "little features" -- such as
> improving the Find, than one "big feature".
>
> Just my humble opinion.
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

You may have had an easy and productive time creating dynamic web pages
based on datawindows but developers who don't know PB won't.  I don't think
Sybase will ever convince any non-PB programmers/managers to build a web app
from the ground up with PowerBuilder.  Basically I think PB missed the boat
on serverside.  There are too many other technologies on the serverside
(Java,.NET) that PB isn't suited to compete against.  PB will never displace
either of these on the server (short of a miracle), so why try?  I would
focus on the battles we can win.

> Like it or not (and 18 months ago I was in the "hate it a lot" camp), the
> web (intranet) is a driving force in development.  A tool that only does
> client/server is severely limiting it's market - something PB doesn't
really
> have room to do.  A tool that does both is a great selling point - buy
this
> tool because no matter what architecture you choose, it will work....

I didn't mean to imply that I wanted it to be client-server only, just
client only.  Or at least client primarily.  I certainly still advocate
multi-tier applications.  As for doing everything, I would disagree.  I
would rather PB focused on one thing or one primary area and did it well.
While it may be limiting its market, I don't think PB has or will make
inroads into the serverside.  That market is already entrenched with Java
and soon to be with .Net.

-chris

Sorry Victor, bandwidth is a little tight and I initially responded without
reading your entire post.  I agree with your assessment of trends and 'bet
the company' decisions to "stay current" but your assessments, while I feel
are correct, are a bit before their time in terms of upper management
realizations in the larger corporate structures.

But if you think about it, if PB integrated more of these technologies they
would have more market share and the availability of other solutions to
integrate with PB would increase and mature.

Just my 2 cents.

-EGM


VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote in message
news:15OyqcfyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> >Do you want it to generate Java?
> No, unless you can explain how that helps me.
>
> >Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
> No, unless you can explain how that helps me.
>
> >Do you think it should focus more on features for
> >client server applications?
> Yes.  I think the other posts speak for themselves.
>
> >Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
> easier?
> Well, maybe, if we can get a pricing model that makes sense for us.  We
never
> even looked at EAServer because we sell our package at a price so low that
the
> EAServer cost would literally eat up most of the profits.
>
> PB web apps are tied to EAServer, which is OK if we can sell our package
and
> make money.  If we can't do that, it doesn't matter how good it is.  We
are
> still using Active Server Pages for our web package, and you get what you
pay
> for.
>
> What I'd really like is the power to develop a *huge* web application with
a RAD
> tool.  Just like developing Client Server is with PowerBuilder -- you just
can't
> beat the programmer productivity!
>
> I don't like *any* web development tool on the market today.  Active
Server
> Pages is way slower to develop than PB.  And, it's hard to maintain too.
I
> still use Notepad primarily, and I'll bet that's true for many.  Seems to
me,
> most ASP applications are pretty small.  We want to port our whole
application
> to the web, but that's a "bet the company" proposal.
>
> For now, I feel comfortable betting the company on Client Server and
Sybase's
> PowerBuilder.  But truthfully, the 8.0 user interface still could use some
work.
> Although it has improved in many ways (multiple DB connections,
Workspaces,
> etc), there is still some polishing needed.  But bottom line, I'm more
> productive there than in any other tool I've seen (and I shop!)
>
> And, for people who really have to have everything on the intranet, we are
> successfully using Terminal Services and Citrix.  That has let us buy time
> before doing a huge rewrite to the web.
>
> Trends change.  A few years ago, some wanted our application to be written
> entirely in Java.  Now some want everything on the web, and to have a
Unix-based
> application server.  Oh, and by the way, it has to connect to our standard
> database, whatever that is now.
>
> We can't rewrite our package every time a trend changes.  It's just too
big.
> The cost to re-write and test, then write a new manual is too high.  We
have to
> keep going with Client Server.  And Client-Server has a much better user
> interface than most web applications anyway.  And, it works!
>
> To thrive and regain glory?  I think the answers are right here in the
user
> group.  The main answer is Marketing.  You have to get this tool into the
hands
> of students and teachers.  You have to build courses and/or books and make
them
> available to people who aren't devoting their entire lives to PB (in other
> words, to people who aren't CPI's.)
>
> Wine and dine your remaining PowerBuilder User Group presidents.  These
people
> work *so* hard and are your greatest fans.  Help user groups, even finance
them
> and set up a rotation system so you don't have just one person doing all
the
> work.  Maybe monthly meetings don't make sense any more, so set up new
groups
> with three meetings a year (offset from the annual Tech Wave).
>
> I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so* helpful
on the
> newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one join?
>
> I spend many years teaching at UC Irvine and running the Orange County PB
User
> Group, and did get some support from Sybase.  More would have been better.
>
> Give people a reason to be a user group president.  Put a link to the user
> groups on your home page, not buried 5 levels down.  Post a picture of the
> person, link to their home page, glorify these people.
>
> Another big issue is to meet people's rising expectations.  People are OK
with
> PB being a Client-Server tool.  But, they are no longer happy with working
> around "beginner bugs".  The two which must be squashed are: Compiler must
> include all objects into EXE, and when adding a new column to an updatable
> datawindow, the new column should be updatable.
>
> Beginners need to have a good "out of the box experience".  One of PB's
> strengths has always been that its Sample Application was far superior to
VB.
> Well, that Sample App has hardly changed in a long time.  Time for an
update.
> It needs 2 killers applications: Screen Customization, and the Rich Text
column
> which works with MS Word.
>
> Finally, the DataWindow, which was the king control of all time, must be
> modernized to meet today's higher expectations.  Grids in particular must
be
> improved, and there are many little suggestions.
>
> One more thing.  I think Sybase is too fond of "big features", to the
detriment
> of "little features".  Compiling to JAVA is viewed as a "big feature" --
> something sellable.  I would rather have 30 "little features" -- such as
> improving the Find, than one "big feature".
>
> Just my humble opinion.
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

If other you could write components in PB that could reside on other app
servers then I would change my entire view point but I don't think thats
gonna happen.  PB components require the PB VM.  I don't think Sybase will
ever convince IBM, BEA or anyone else to incorporate the PB VM into their
products.  Maybe somehow Sybase could create a solution that would make a PB
component looks like a C++ or Java component inside these app servers but
they would still carry the VM with each component.  They would be very large
and also not very fast.  I doesn't seem to me that this would be a viable
solution.

Some people have suggested that PB generate java bytecode.  That would work
but I'm guessing that would be an incredibly difficult feature for Sybase to
make.  And would probably be prone with errors and problems.  This way or
another similar way (one that gets rid of the dependence on the VM) is the
only way I see PB components in other app servers.  And I just don't think
you can seperate the VM from PB.  Granted I'm speculating widely based on
what I know of PB.

As good a product as EAServer may be, PB won't make it on the serverside in
just EAServer alone.

-chris


"Mark Maslow" <mark.maslow@sierraclub.org> wrote in message
news:sTRwF6gyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> I most certainly do not agree that PB should stick to being client-side.
> None of the languages you cite come close to being as productive for
writing
> database aware business components.  Of course, practically nobody outside
> of the inner circle knows this, which is indeed a problem for the
long-term
> viability of the language.  If one could use the language to create
> components on other app servers, and Sybase discovered marketing, it would
> be dynamite.  But very, very big ifs, I admit.
>
> Mark Maslow
>
> "Chris" <schtoo@schtoo.com> wrote in message
> news:A1OLDJfyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> > My honest opinion:
> >
> > PB should stick to being a client-side development tool.  If I want to
> have
> > a partitioned app with different tiers I may want to use PowerBuilder on
> the
> > client side but I don't think I would ever choose PowerBuilder for the
> > server side.  I don't think the PowerBuilder language will ever become a
> > serious contender on the server.  It can't compete against Java, C++,
> .Net.
> >
> > One of the things I think is looong overdue and I heard was finally
coming
> > about in 9 is the ability for PB to interact with app servers other than
> > EAServer.  I think Sybase should go about making PB work as seemlessly
as
> > possible with EAServer, WebSphere, WebLogic, .Net.  I want these
> connections
> > to work like database connections do (for the most part).  That is I
want
> to
> > be able to write my clientside code without concern about what the
backend
> > is.
> >
> > I think PB needs to focus more on GUI functionality.  Some people have
> said
> > that its not to hard to point out a PowerBuilder app.  Thats because PB
is
> > not pretty.  I think PB needs to get pretty to compete on the
clientside.
> > Modern visual functionality and GUI components.
> >
> > The problem with all this is that the datawindow doesn't really fit in
> with
> > this.  I think the datawindow needs to be reworked so you can visually
> > design a datawindow with an object as a source.  This object would most
> > likely be a component on your server.  Once you partition your app, it
> seems
> > illogical that you should still be designing your datawindow against the
> > database.  If you are architecting correctly, the datawindow should be
> > designed by what the component is passing to the client, not the
database.
> > IMO.
> >
> > Do I want PB to generate Java?
> > No
> >
> > Do you want it to compile to the MSIL layer for .NET?
> > I have no idea what that is so No.
> >
> > Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
> > applications?
> > Not necessarily client-server, but client-side Yes.
> >
> > Do you think it should incorporate more features to make web development
> > easier?
> > No, there are a ton of better web development tools, why would I choose
> PB.
> >
> > Is it important to you that PowerBuilder can generate web services (or
> > consume them) or does that not interest you in the least?
> > Generate, No.  Consume, Yes.
> >
> > One last reason why I don't think PB can make it on the server is that
it
> > can only work in EAServer.  Thats enough to assure me that it will never
> be
> > anything but a niche on the server.  Even if EAServer makes it big time,
> the
> > only people writting components for it will be old PB shops.
> >
> > -chris
> >
> > ps.  Ok one last last thing.  Java didn't make it to the client.  Thats
> > where I now see the gap.
> >
> > p.p.s.  I also think someone should change the name.  I've always
thought
> > PowerBuilder sounded dumb.  Changing the name might help in re-inventing
> it.
> > We could, of course, continue with the confusing Sybase name changing
> > paradigm.  For example, Adaptive Builder Enteprise or Enterprise
Adaptive
> > Power.
> >
> > "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> > news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> > > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> > >
> > > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> > > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> > >
> > > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> > > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> > > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> > > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> > > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> > >
> > > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> > > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> > > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> > > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> > >
> > > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> > > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> > > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> > > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> > > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> > > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> > > hear others.)
> > >
> > > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> > > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> > >
> > > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> > > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> > > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> > > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> > > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> > > to start that change now.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Amen.  This is exactly what I was trying to say.

"Nathan W. Phelps" <nphelps@solarc.com> wrote in message
news:eW9AJ8gyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> I read a post a few days ago from Roy Kiesler that Raj Nathan said that
..NET
> support would be included in PowerBuilder 9.0.  I'm assuming that this is
> certainly not happening since you're asking these sorts of questions now?
>
> Secondly, I think the biggest area where PowerBuilder could fill a void is
> by becoming THE client-side for J2EE applications.  I mean PowerBuilder
has
> always been about the DataWindow, and I frankly don't see how the
> DataWindows fits in at all in a well architected multi-tier development
> model.  I welcome someone to explain to me how I'm wrong on that one,
> because that is currently an area of confusion for me since I don't use
the
> DataWindow.  But what I'm getting at is PowerBuilder needs a new niche.  I
> personally see a void as far as tools to help easily develop traditional
> graphical user interfaces for J2EE applications.  I'm a big fan of Java,
> which is what I do a majority of my development in, but frankly I'm not a
> fan of Java on the client.  If Sybase could provide a stellar environment
> for building an UI that could talk to any J2EE application server I think
> that might be an area where it could excel.  Sybase could do this as a
..NET
> language or as it is today with the PBVM.  I also think it is absolutely
> critical that PowerBuilder continue to sport tight integration with
> EAServer.  This is the ONLY migration path that PowerBuilder shops have to
> take third client-server applications to the three-tier model.  If this
> support goes away, those shops are going to be forced to simply recode
> everything in a different environment and no one wants to do that.
>
> Lastly, I think it is important that PowerBuilder continue to support the
> traditional client-server development model.  Frankly, in many situations
> n-tier is complete overkill.  If  you need to build a departmental
> application with a traditional UI, then PowerBuilder does the job pretty
> well.
>
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> >
> > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> >
> > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> >
> > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> >
> > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> > hear others.)
> >
> > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> >
> > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> > to start that change now.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
>
>

> While it may be limiting its market, I don't think PB has or will make
> inroads into the serverside.

I disagree.  The leverage of so many client-server apps (and the teams who
develop/maintain them) is the perfect in-road to a server-side development
market-share with PB.  If the development of the technology and the
marketing model is sound and Sybase doesn't expect immediate response before
pulling the plug.

> I don't think
> Sybase will ever convince any non-PB programmers/managers to build a web
app
> from the ground up with PowerBuilder.

If the existing corporate PB teams can develop web-apps that work and are
scalable then word-of-mouth will aid the marketing effort and development
teams will pop-up all over the place.

> That market is already entrenched with Java
> and soon to be with .Net.

If .NET can compete where Java is pretty firmly entrenched (which in many
opinions fails miserably on the client-side) then why not PB as well, where
the same tool can be used on both the server AND the client side.


Just my 2 cents.

-EGM

Chris <schtoo@schtoo.com> wrote in message
news:8Z906ahyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> You may have had an easy and productive time creating dynamic web pages
> based on datawindows but developers who don't know PB won't.  I don't
think
> Sybase will ever convince any non-PB programmers/managers to build a web
app
> from the ground up with PowerBuilder.  Basically I think PB missed the
boat
> on serverside.  There are too many other technologies on the serverside
> (Java,.NET) that PB isn't suited to compete against.  PB will never
displace
> either of these on the server (short of a miracle), so why try?  I would
> focus on the battles we can win.
>
> > Like it or not (and 18 months ago I was in the "hate it a lot" camp),
the
> > web (intranet) is a driving force in development.  A tool that only does
> > client/server is severely limiting it's market - something PB doesn't
> really
> > have room to do.  A tool that does both is a great selling point - buy
> this
> > tool because no matter what architecture you choose, it will work....
>
> I didn't mean to imply that I wanted it to be client-server only, just
> client only.  Or at least client primarily.  I certainly still advocate
> multi-tier applications.  As for doing everything, I would disagree.  I
> would rather PB focused on one thing or one primary area and did it well.
> While it may be limiting its market, I don't think PB has or will make
> inroads into the serverside.  That market is already entrenched with Java
> and soon to be with .Net.
>
> -chris
>
>

Personally, I've never considered the newsgroup as a place to learn about
new stuff. Yes, I have learned most of what I know from the newsgroup, but
I'd like to see a place where people can get together and say, "Hey, look at
what I did! It's neat, and I learned that....." I just don't get that in a
newsgroup.


"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:5QmbBjgyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> I don't know.  I can't help but think that what killed the user groups was
> well supported newsgroups.  What did you go to a user group for?  I went
to
> learn about new stuff, to interact with other developers, and for free
pizza
> and soda <g>.  It seems to me that the first two are being met here, and I
> can participate as my own time schedule allows.  They could be augmented a
bit,
> I'd like to see online presentations that allow for question and answer
> sesions (the online equivalent of the meeting presentations).  Not just
from
> the Sybase folks and the big corporations, and but the average Joe
developer
> with something to show as well.  Perhaps they could be recorded and made
> available for later viewing.
>
> But, aside from not being able to scarf down on free virtual pizza and
soda,
> what else are we missing?
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:36:16 -0500,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Edward Muesch <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".  As
far
> >as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.
Even
> >more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
> >attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this
case,
> >Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
> >providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and newsletter.
> >The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
augmented
> >in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree
are
> >almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations are
> >integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer - User.
> >Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
> >footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses)
read
> >day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has been
> >instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
> >corporate world.
> >
> >My 2 cents.
> >
> >-EGM
> >
> >Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> >news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> >> One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very
big
> >> corporations out of the newsgroups..
> >>
> >> I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how it
> >> seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed to
be
> >> like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We did
> >very
> >> little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
> >> things.
> >>
> >> Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

In a different post I mention the Building the Future seminars - these
showed how simple it was.... personally, I think it takes more JSP knowledge
to get the stock HTML generator working than PB skills (datawindow painter
aside - but that's almost as simple as point and click drop and drag -- for
basic DWs at least).


"Chris" <schtoo@schtoo.com> wrote in message
news:8Z906ahyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> You may have had an easy and productive time creating dynamic web pages
> based on datawindows but developers who don't know PB won't.  I don't
think
> Sybase will ever convince any non-PB programmers/managers to build a web
app
> from the ground up with PowerBuilder.  Basically I think PB missed the
boat
> on serverside.  There are too many other technologies on the serverside
> (Java,.NET) that PB isn't suited to compete against.  PB will never
displace
> either of these on the server (short of a miracle), so why try?  I would
> focus on the battles we can win.
>
> > Like it or not (and 18 months ago I was in the "hate it a lot" camp),
the
> > web (intranet) is a driving force in development.  A tool that only does
> > client/server is severely limiting it's market - something PB doesn't
> really
> > have room to do.  A tool that does both is a great selling point - buy
> this
> > tool because no matter what architecture you choose, it will work....
>
> I didn't mean to imply that I wanted it to be client-server only, just
> client only.  Or at least client primarily.  I certainly still advocate
> multi-tier applications.  As for doing everything, I would disagree.  I
> would rather PB focused on one thing or one primary area and did it well.
> While it may be limiting its market, I don't think PB has or will make
> inroads into the serverside.  That market is already entrenched with Java
> and soon to be with .Net.
>
> -chris
>
>

But that's the point of the virtual online presentations I mentioned as
something we needed to add.

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 17:05:08 -0600,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Bug <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote: 
>Personally, I've never considered the newsgroup as a place to learn about
>new stuff. Yes, I have learned most of what I know from the newsgroup, but
>I'd like to see a place where people can get together and say, "Hey, look at
>what I did! It's neat, and I learned that....." I just don't get that in a
>newsgroup.
>
>
>"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
>wrote in message news:5QmbBjgyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
>> I don't know.  I can't help but think that what killed the user groups was
>> well supported newsgroups.  What did you go to a user group for?  I went
>to
>> learn about new stuff, to interact with other developers, and for free
>pizza
>> and soda <g>.  It seems to me that the first two are being met here, and I
>> can participate as my own time schedule allows.  They could be augmented a
>bit,
>> I'd like to see online presentations that allow for question and answer
>> sesions (the online equivalent of the meeting presentations).  Not just
>from
>> the Sybase folks and the big corporations, and but the average Joe
>developer
>> with something to show as well.  Perhaps they could be recorded and made
>> available for later viewing.
>>
>> But, aside from not being able to scarf down on free virtual pizza and
>soda,
>> what else are we missing?
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:36:16 -0500,
>>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>> Edward Muesch <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".  As
>far
>> >as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.
>Even
>> >more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
>> >attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this
>case,
>> >Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive in
>> >providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and newsletter.
>> >The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
>augmented
>> >in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I agree
>are
>> >almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations are
>> >integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer - User.
>> >Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the PB
>> >footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our bosses)
>read
>> >day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has been
>> >instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
>> >corporate world.
>> >
>> >My 2 cents.
>> >
>> >-EGM
>> >
>> >Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
>> >news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
>> >> One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the very
>big
>> >> corporations out of the newsgroups..
>> >>
>> >> I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only how it
>> >> seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead) seemed to
>be
>> >> like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We did
>> >very
>> >> little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might do
>> >> things.
>> >>
>> >> Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to me.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> http://www.teamsybase.com
>> http://www.needhim.org
>>
>> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Are you referring to the CRL and all that, or to web services?

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 14:06:46 -0800,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote: 
>>Secondly, I think the biggest area where PowerBuilder could fill a void is
>>by becoming THE client-side for J2EE applications
>
>I may be out of my element on this but it seems to me that what dot net does
>is completly change the plumbing.  They have created a new standard and it
>appears to me they are going to be able to carry it off.  All of the major
>players, including Sybase if I recall correctly, seem to be on board.
>
>
>
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I'll post a PowerPoint next week. <g>


"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:EhUS21hyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> But that's the point of the virtual online presentations I mentioned as
> something we needed to add.
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 17:05:08 -0600,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Bug <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Personally, I've never considered the newsgroup as a place to learn about
> >new stuff. Yes, I have learned most of what I know from the newsgroup,
but
> >I'd like to see a place where people can get together and say, "Hey, look
at
> >what I did! It's neat, and I learned that....." I just don't get that in
a
> >newsgroup.

Only if you promise to attach the viewer too <g>

-EGM

Bug <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5$J2v#hyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> I'll post a PowerPoint next week. <g>
>
>
> "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
> wrote in message news:EhUS21hyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> > But that's the point of the virtual online presentations I mentioned as
> > something we needed to add.
> >
> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 17:05:08 -0600,
> >  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> > Bug <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >Personally, I've never considered the newsgroup as a place to learn
about
> > >new stuff. Yes, I have learned most of what I know from the newsgroup,
> but
> > >I'd like to see a place where people can get together and say, "Hey,
look
> at
> > >what I did! It's neat, and I learned that....." I just don't get that
in
> a
> > >newsgroup.
>
>
>

I'm not getting where you're going here.  Can you clarify?  Are you talking
about WinForms or the entire .NET platform?

"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:jtkjDMhyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
>
> I may be out of my element on this but it seems to me that what dot net
does
> is completly change the plumbing.  They have created a new standard and it
> appears to me they are going to be able to carry it off.  All of the major
> players, including Sybase if I recall correctly, seem to be on board.

I'm talking about the entire dot net platform.


"Nathan Phelps" <nphelps@valornet.com> wrote in message
news:fTkhSdiyBHA.322@forums.sybase.com...
> I'm not getting where you're going here.  Can you clarify?  Are you
talking
> about WinForms or the entire .NET platform?
>
> "Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> news:jtkjDMhyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> >
> > I may be out of my element on this but it seems to me that what dot net
> does
> > is completly change the plumbing.  They have created a new standard and
it
> > appears to me they are going to be able to carry it off.  All of the
major
> > players, including Sybase if I recall correctly, seem to be on board.
>
>

All the major players?  Ah, Sun Microsystems isn't on board, IBM isn't on
board, BEA isn't on board, Oracle isn't on board, Borland isn't on board...

Sybase is currently working with Microsoft to decide the best way to support
..NET in its products.  As of yet, however, it appears no decisions have been
made.

Of course .NET is a whole new ball game... that's the point isn't it?  My
post was to simply point out that--regardless if Sybase chooses to support
..NET or not--they might be able to make PowerBuilder into an ideal platform
to build UIs for J2EE applications.  There're already very close to this
sort of support with the features that have been added to PowerBuilder 9.0.
If they were to add .NET support fine, the UI code would subclass .NET
WinForms, otherwise it would subclass the MFC--same old thing.  While
everyone would probably agree that Microsoft does a much better job of
creating and IDE (Visual Studio .NET rocks), we cannot expect Microsoft to
provide native support for building front ends to J2EE applications.  If
PowerBuilder sported such support, they might be on to something.


"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:jtkjDMhyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
>
> I may be out of my element on this but it seems to me that what dot net
does
> is completly change the plumbing.  They have created a new standard and it
> appears to me they are going to be able to carry it off.  All of the major
> players, including Sybase if I recall correctly, seem to be on board.
>
>

> If .NET can compete where Java is pretty firmly entrenched (which in many
> opinions fails miserably on the client-side) then why not PB as well,
where
> the same tool can be used on both the server AND the client side.

Because Sybase is not Microsoft.  .NET isn't even complete yet and look at
the following it has.  EAServer has been out for X years and it would be
generous to say that EAServer has 10% of that.

PowerBuilder has no mindshare outside of existing PowerBuilder developers.
Ask a non-PB developer if he would ever consider using PowerBuilder to
develop a web app and he'd look at you cross-eyed.

-chris

I feel a need to jump in, and I don't want to step on any toes. Marketing is
an animla measured only by a company's bottom line. If you've done a good
job, your bottom line improves. I read probably 20 magazines a month. There
are probably a 1000 magazines out there. If Sybase advertises and pushes
their product heavily in 100 of those magazines and I don't happen to read
any of them, to me, the marketing sucks.

That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a lot.
We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing budget -
for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.

On the other hand, I have seen Sybase ads, press releases, articles all over
the place, including several key online publishers like ZD Online, InfoWorld
et al. I opened up a PC Magazine the other day at my sons doctors office,
and the first page I opened to - a Sybase ad. They've had articles in
Computer Reseller News (that I've yet to actually find someone who actually
reads <g>), DM Review, Infoworld, of course PBDJ and JDJ among others. I
believe next months PBDJ will ship with the developer edition of EAServer
4.1 inside. I've personally been asked to, and have participated in
interviews with Gartner, Giga, Forester and AMR Research, so they're getting
analysts involved. Their webinars have been well-received. There is actually
so much going on that it's hard to keep track of what's going on next, and
where. I believe that the penetration is being made. The first step was to
change the perception of Sybase as a database company to an infrastructure
company. That was not targeted at developers, but at the C-level of
management. The next step is to create awareness of their products, and that
is currently under way. We all want to see more advertising, and more
marketing, and if anyone has a good concrete idea, the marketing group would
love to hear it. I'd be happy to serve as the conduit between anyone here
and the marketing group, but I would suggest first talking to your sales
rep. Make them get involved at your company to show what Sybase has to
offer. I did this at a client, and i thought I was pretty clued up with what
Sybase does and what products they have. I was amazed with what I didn't
know about.

The marketing push is going on. It may not be felt for a while, but I'm at
least convinced that stealth marketing has gone by the wayside. The
marketing group is aggresive, and, my favorite part, is willing to butt
heads with their opponents rather than take the high road anymore.


OK, off my soapbox here. Again, if anyone thinks they have some great ideas
to help promote the marketing, feel free to get in touch with me. I will not
hesitate to pass you on to the marketing person I have been dealing with.

regards,
Bill Green



"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:w7MAfvfyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> >To thrive and regain glory?  I think the answers are right here in the
user
> >group.  The main answer is Marketing
>
> I too think marketing is key but I would take a different tack.  You can't
> even buy PowerBuilder in a regular computer store like CompUSA.  If it can
> be bought at all it has to be special ordered.
>
> Why not do adds in PC week.  The comman man, and mere mortals, have to
know
> about the product.  Sybase is so classy in other ways.  The tech support
on
> line is great and they are obviously so professional in other ways.  It's
> just that there is zero name recognition with regard to PowerBuilder.  If
> they would advertise it as the best client/server tool on the market, it
> would be hard to refute.
>
> There's nothing other than Borland right now that fills that nitch.
VB.net
> can't be purchased with a report writer for less than $1,200.00.  Delphi
is
> easily purchased at most big computer stores.
>
> By the way, tech support for how to make Crystal reports work with the
> integrated VS.net environment is allmost nill.  There is no MS newsgroup
for
> this that is monitored by Crystal and only a few messages a day are
passing
> through Crystal's internal news group.  My understanding is that Crystal
has
> pretty good support if you are willing to pay (again a big corporation
> thing) but if you want any support like we have on these newsgroup, good
> luck.
>
> A lot of good that does a developer who does not have a several thousand
> dollar technical support budget.
>
>
>

My take is that you need to support any/all J2EE containers as a PB client,
you need to support .Net but I'm not sure to what level (generate components
that can be deployed in a .net server?), and I think to solve the "use
another server" issue, be able to deploy a PB component as a pure Java Bean
(not necessarily an EJB). I understand some of the ramifications, but
probably 90% is very easily generated. I also (havn't thought this one all
the way through yet) would like to take a datawindow and generate an EJB out
of it, and be able to use an EJB as the datasource for a datwindow.

Bill


"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>
> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>
> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>
> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>
> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> hear others.)
>
> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>
> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> to start that change now.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

Seems slike nobody in this discussion applaude the mentioning of Pb support
for web-services... I do - I'd like to use them, create them and maintain
them in my Pb!

In the future, I guess that XML web services seems to be THE way of handling
net-wide structured information exchange.

Anders �gnses
Funn as
Narvik

"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>
> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>
> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>
> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>
> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> hear others.)
>
> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>
> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> to start that change now.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

I don't want to call PB "unusable", but I think it is scandalous that:

1)  When you write an SQL statement in a script, the column names in the
statement are checked by the compiler, but when
you reference datawindow columns they are not, leaving you to find the error
by running it.

2) Field lengths in datawindows are not checked by the compiler for
conformance to the db, again leading to runtime errors when databases
change.

3) The debugger doesn't know about datawindows at all.

4) Diagnostics from datawindows seem almost deliberately uninformative.

These are problems that have been present for many years, and they are
problems in PB's best differentiator!  Datawindows ought to really shine by
now.  Someone ought to be ashamed.

PB might have been "everybody's trusty database API".  Could it still?  I
don't know.

--Joe Landau



"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e331c.11592198@199.93.177.77...
>
> >>Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
applications?
> >Yes, but first make the damn thing USABLE! Send all the high-tech geeks
on a
> >well deserved cruise and bring in a team of usability experts to perform
> >disaster control. Before the geeks return set all their home pages to
"The
> >Interface Hall of Shame" ( http://www.iarchitect.com/shame.htm ).
> >
> Without causing this thread to degenerate into another enhancements
> list, why do you think it is unusable?
>
> >Sorry, this isn't exactly bringing the discussion up to a higher level,
is it?
>
> No, but if you intend to (and want to) continue to be a PB developer
> then we need to listen to your complaints and respond where we can.
>
> Do others agree with Bill's comments? In your opinion Is PB unusable?
> Does it have a horrible interface?
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

IMHO PowerBuilder is never going to happen the way it should if you can not
buy it at a regular software outlet like CompUSA.   How you do that, I don't
know, but others do.  If Delphi can, why not us?

And please the focus of marketing should not only be in the States but also
in europe and other part of the world!!!
Powerbuilder is a great tool for client server AND multi tier but if no
manager has heard of it, it won't be used. If a non PB-programmer won't
consider to step into PB and it's splendid datawindows it's because he
doesn't know the product. And the first step is making both the managers and
the non pb-developers warm. And that's where marketing needs to start!!!

"Bill Green[TeamSybase]" <bill.green@teamsybase.com> wrote in message
news:EBdi2PkyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> I feel a need to jump in, and I don't want to step on any toes. Marketing
is
> an animla measured only by a company's bottom line. If you've done a good
> job, your bottom line improves. I read probably 20 magazines a month.
There
> are probably a 1000 magazines out there. If Sybase advertises and pushes
> their product heavily in 100 of those magazines and I don't happen to read
> any of them, to me, the marketing sucks.
>
> That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
> small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a lot.
> We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing budget -
> for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
> That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
> almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
>
> On the other hand, I have seen Sybase ads, press releases, articles all
over
> the place, including several key online publishers like ZD Online,
InfoWorld
> et al. I opened up a PC Magazine the other day at my sons doctors office,
> and the first page I opened to - a Sybase ad. They've had articles in
> Computer Reseller News (that I've yet to actually find someone who
actually
> reads <g>), DM Review, Infoworld, of course PBDJ and JDJ among others. I
> believe next months PBDJ will ship with the developer edition of EAServer
> 4.1 inside. I've personally been asked to, and have participated in
> interviews with Gartner, Giga, Forester and AMR Research, so they're
getting
> analysts involved. Their webinars have been well-received. There is
actually
> so much going on that it's hard to keep track of what's going on next, and
> where. I believe that the penetration is being made. The first step was to
> change the perception of Sybase as a database company to an infrastructure
> company. That was not targeted at developers, but at the C-level of
> management. The next step is to create awareness of their products, and
that
> is currently under way. We all want to see more advertising, and more
> marketing, and if anyone has a good concrete idea, the marketing group
would
> love to hear it. I'd be happy to serve as the conduit between anyone here
> and the marketing group, but I would suggest first talking to your sales
> rep. Make them get involved at your company to show what Sybase has to
> offer. I did this at a client, and i thought I was pretty clued up with
what
> Sybase does and what products they have. I was amazed with what I didn't
> know about.
>
> The marketing push is going on. It may not be felt for a while, but I'm at
> least convinced that stealth marketing has gone by the wayside. The
> marketing group is aggresive, and, my favorite part, is willing to butt
> heads with their opponents rather than take the high road anymore.
>
>
> OK, off my soapbox here. Again, if anyone thinks they have some great
ideas
> to help promote the marketing, feel free to get in touch with me. I will
not
> hesitate to pass you on to the marketing person I have been dealing with.
>
> regards,
> Bill Green
>
>
>
> "Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> news:w7MAfvfyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> > >To thrive and regain glory?  I think the answers are right here in the
> user
> > >group.  The main answer is Marketing
> >
> > I too think marketing is key but I would take a different tack.  You
can't
> > even buy PowerBuilder in a regular computer store like CompUSA.  If it
can
> > be bought at all it has to be special ordered.
> >
> > Why not do adds in PC week.  The comman man, and mere mortals, have to
> know
> > about the product.  Sybase is so classy in other ways.  The tech support
> on
> > line is great and they are obviously so professional in other ways.
It's
> > just that there is zero name recognition with regard to PowerBuilder.
If
> > they would advertise it as the best client/server tool on the market, it
> > would be hard to refute.
> >
> > There's nothing other than Borland right now that fills that nitch.
> VB.net
> > can't be purchased with a report writer for less than $1,200.00.  Delphi
> is
> > easily purchased at most big computer stores.
> >
> > By the way, tech support for how to make Crystal reports work with the
> > integrated VS.net environment is allmost nill.  There is no MS newsgroup
> for
> > this that is monitored by Crystal and only a few messages a day are
> passing
> > through Crystal's internal news group.  My understanding is that Crystal
> has
> > pretty good support if you are willing to pay (again a big corporation
> > thing) but if you want any support like we have on these newsgroup, good
> > luck.
> >
> > A lot of good that does a developer who does not have a several thousand
> > dollar technical support budget.
> >
> >
> >
>
>

You could look at this as a benefit.  We use dynamic dataobject assignment -
often times passing in the dataobject name to a function that assigns it to
the datawindow/store - this allows us to make truely generic code.  How
could the compiler check the columns?

About when you create a datawindow/store dynamically on the fly at run
time - how would the compiler know anything about it?

The edit checks work okay if you are just using plain old vanilla
datawindows on a window with vanilla access to it - but that is only a
fraction of the possible use of datawindows.  Having the compiler try to
check all the dynamic uses would be an exercise in futility.


"Joe Landau" <jrl@versaform.com> wrote in message
news:O$7ZG8lyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> I don't want to call PB "unusable", but I think it is scandalous that:
>
> 1)  When you write an SQL statement in a script, the column names in the
> statement are checked by the compiler, but when
> you reference datawindow columns they are not, leaving you to find the
error
> by running it.
>
> 2) Field lengths in datawindows are not checked by the compiler for
> conformance to the db, again leading to runtime errors when databases
> change.
>
> 3) The debugger doesn't know about datawindows at all.
>
> 4) Diagnostics from datawindows seem almost deliberately uninformative.
>
> These are problems that have been present for many years, and they are
> problems in PB's best differentiator!  Datawindows ought to really shine
by
> now.  Someone ought to be ashamed.
>
> PB might have been "everybody's trusty database API".  Could it still?  I
> don't know.
>
> --Joe Landau
>
>
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8e331c.11592198@199.93.177.77...
> >
> > >>Do you think it should focus more on features for client server
> applications?
> > >Yes, but first make the damn thing USABLE! Send all the high-tech geeks
> on a
> > >well deserved cruise and bring in a team of usability experts to
perform
> > >disaster control. Before the geeks return set all their home pages to
> "The
> > >Interface Hall of Shame" ( http://www.iarchitect.com/shame.htm ).
> > >
> > Without causing this thread to degenerate into another enhancements
> > list, why do you think it is unusable?
> >
> > >Sorry, this isn't exactly bringing the discussion up to a higher level,
> is it?
> >
> > No, but if you intend to (and want to) continue to be a PB developer
> > then we need to listen to your complaints and respond where we can.
> >
> > Do others agree with Bill's comments? In your opinion Is PB unusable?
> > Does it have a horrible interface?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
>
>

> Resources are limited. I'd hate to see Sybase devote a lot of
> resources (time & money) to a feature that developers have little
> interest in.
It won't take a lot of effort for SYBASE to put back DPB.  And that is a
good feature if you plan to sell applications to small business.

C.Burns

"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3c8e3c50.13948336@199.93.177.77...
>
> >Dave,
> >
> >I'm still a newbie at all this and there are thing in PB that could be
> >better, but I'm not sure on something.  Is Sybase pulling away from
> >client-server to catch up to what everyone else is doing?
> >
>
> No not at all. Sybase recognizes that there is still a big demand out
> their for a client server development tool. I also think that PB's web
> and n-tier support is pretty solid (especially what is planned for PB
> 9). I can't think of many other tools out there that let you do what
> PB does in one package.
>
> We know what the analyst are saying PB should do. Product management
> has ideas on where PB should go based on industry trends, etc. but I
> want to hear what the people at the coal-face so to speak want.
>
> Resources are limited. I'd hate to see Sybase devote a lot of
> resources (time & money) to a feature that developers have little
> interest in.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

See my comments inline:

>> I don't want to call PB "unusable", but I think it is scandalous that:
>>
>> 1)  When you write an SQL statement in a script, the column names in the
>> statement are checked by the compiler, but when
>> you reference datawindow columns they are not, leaving you to find the
>error
>> by running it.
>>

This sounds like an interesting new feature: the ability to request a syntax
check for datawindows.  I like it.

>> 2) Field lengths in datawindows are not checked by the compiler for
>> conformance to the db, again leading to runtime errors when databases
>> change.

Similar to 1), this sounds like an interesting new feature: the ability to
request a syntax check for datawindows and *automatically* change field lengths.
I dread increasing a column length because it takes a while to make these
changes.  I like it.

>>
>> 3) The debugger doesn't know about datawindows at all.

There is a suggestion to let us view datawindow data in the debugger.  Nice idea
-- I support it.

>>
>> 4) Diagnostics from datawindows seem almost deliberately uninformative.
>> ...

Well, I have suggested that the message "Invalid datawindow row/column ..." be
split into two messages, and that the message tell us the row / column which the
code requested.  Is it fair to say that you support that request?

>> --Joe Landau


---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I think it would be great too - something to catch my own programming
miscues, but I just don't think it's practical.

Consider this block of code:


if ab_showFinancial then
    dw_1.dataobject = "d_customer_with_financial_info"
else
    dw_1.dataobject = "d_customer_simple"
end if

dw_1.setTransObject(SQLCA)
dw_1.insertRow(1)
dw_1.setItemDecimal(1, "credit_limit", 1000)


Assuming that ab_showFinancial is passed in as an argument (a situation I
picked to provide a case in which the compiler whould have absolutely no
idea what the value is) and "credit_limit" is on only one
"d_customer_with_financial_info" - what datawindow would the complier pick
to validate against - if it picked the first, you'ld get a false sense of
security.  Then complicate this further and say I pass in the dataobject and
column to set set as arguments --- the compiler is even further in the dark
as to what it's supposed to check.

And how about this - I write the code, it validates it okay, then I change
the datawindow and forget to change the code.  Again - I am left with a
false sense of security because the complier checked my code - unless you do
this at build time also - which would really slow the build process down.

Making it an optional request might answer some of my concerns, but it
sounds to me like it would take time away from a more important modification
to provide an edit check that would be useful only <some> of the time.

I would love it if the compiler could catch all my programming bugs, but I
would rather the time be spent working on some of the other features.

(Note that I only speak to point 1 - the increased debugger knowledge of the
DW and the improced messages are something I would support - the field
length thing is something you could easily write a small app to check for
you, and even correct).

D



"VictorReinhart" <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote in message
news:#3QbqVqyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> See my comments inline:
>
> >> I don't want to call PB "unusable", but I think it is scandalous that:
> >>
> >> 1)  When you write an SQL statement in a script, the column names in
the
> >> statement are checked by the compiler, but when
> >> you reference datawindow columns they are not, leaving you to find the
> >error
> >> by running it.
> >>
>
> This sounds like an interesting new feature: the ability to request a
syntax
> check for datawindows.  I like it.
>
> >> 2) Field lengths in datawindows are not checked by the compiler for
> >> conformance to the db, again leading to runtime errors when databases
> >> change.
>
> Similar to 1), this sounds like an interesting new feature: the ability to
> request a syntax check for datawindows and *automatically* change field
lengths.
> I dread increasing a column length because it takes a while to make these
> changes.  I like it.
>
> >>
> >> 3) The debugger doesn't know about datawindows at all.
>
> There is a suggestion to let us view datawindow data in the debugger.
Nice idea
> -- I support it.
>
> >>
> >> 4) Diagnostics from datawindows seem almost deliberately uninformative.
> >> ...
>
> Well, I have suggested that the message "Invalid datawindow row/column
...." be
> split into two messages, and that the message tell us the row / column
which the
> code requested.  Is it fair to say that you support that request?
>
> >> --Joe Landau
>
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Wow, a couple of days without visiting this newsgroup and there's a good solid
half hour of reading through posts to do....

First, Dave's original post on this thread is great - and we certainly want your
input for direction and key features, and we need to know what you're using PB
for now, and how you see it being used in your organizations in the future.
Since there are many different types of users out there, there should be a
variety of answers. We need to know if you see roadblocks to PB being used in
the foreseeable future in your organization, and what changes, etc, are need in
the product to help keep PB as a vital tool in your development toolset.

Let me just clarify a few things-
PB will continue to focus on client/server development. There are a lot of
customers out there who will continue to use PB for C/S development, and there
are many applications that do not need to go to the web. C/S developers need to
be productive and deliver robust applications quickly - that's what we'll
continue to focus on in this area.

PB will work with 3rd party application servers. The first phase will be acting
as a client to WebSphere and WebLogic, the second will be to deploy into those
servers.  We will continue to work with EAServer as well - that's still the
easiest and quickest way for PB customers to quickly move to the web and a
distributed architecture.

We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10 years old,
and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is true for
any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
programming environment before the many languages and standards we have today
existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in progress, but
it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy new
feature to write about like XML is.

Thanks to Bill Green for his fabulous post in this thread - he's right on the
money with a lot of his comments and insight.  Someone else made a comment about
how PB "can't compete against Java, C++, .Net."  That's the beauty of PB - we
don't need to compete with it, but rather we will remain an open tool and allow
you to work with the other languages and platforms in your business environment.
With PB, you don't have to choose between .NET or J2EE, but you can instead
continue to be as productive as possible, developing in a tool you're familiar
with, while the complexities of new architectures, object models, and standards
are abstracted.

Also, thanks to Anders for the forward looking comment regarding Web Services!
We are really excited for the future of PB. Keep the cards and letters coming :)

Sue Dunnell
PB Product Manager

"Anders �gsnes" wrote:

> Seems slike nobody in this discussion applaude the mentioning of Pb support
> for web-services... I do - I'd like to use them, create them and maintain
> them in my Pb!
>
> In the future, I guess that XML web services seems to be THE way of handling
> net-wide structured information exchange.
>
> Anders �gnses
> Funn as
> Narvik
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> >
> > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> >
> > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> >
> > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> >
> > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> > hear others.)
> >
> > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> >
> > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> > to start that change now.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >

Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.  I
think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version of the
product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The key
is: he *saw* it!

Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't think
it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop" databases.
Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused and
disappointed with this limitation.

We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to buy PB
Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must* connect to
Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the shining
star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't happen.
Please, please, please, limit the product another way.

Marketing happens many ways:

1) Advertising.
Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary strategy,
but rather, the third strategy.

2) Leading-Edge Developers
People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should* be *the*
primary strategy.

3) Students
People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should* be
Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.

4) User Groups
Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.

That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
a) Allow *full* connectivity
b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.  Pick
something which won't kill the project immediately.
c) Help me here, folks!

My humble opinion.

>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a lot.
>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing budget -
>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.


---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

How about seminars targeted at customers - show up at their door, offer them
free food - spend a lunch hour demoing the PB and what it can do - kind of
like the Build The Future seminar on speed.


"VictorReinhart" <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote in message
news:EnXmhtqyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.
I
> think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version
of the
> product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The
key
> is: he *saw* it!
>
> Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
think
> it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
databases.
> Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
and
> disappointed with this limitation.
>
> We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to
buy PB
> Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
connect to
> Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
shining
> star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
happen.
> Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
>
> Marketing happens many ways:
>
> 1) Advertising.
> Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
strategy,
> but rather, the third strategy.
>
> 2) Leading-Edge Developers
> People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should* be
*the*
> primary strategy.
>
> 3) Students
> People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should*
be
> Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
>
> 4) User Groups
> Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
>
> That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> a) Allow *full* connectivity
> b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.  Pick
> something which won't kill the project immediately.
> c) Help me here, folks!
>
> My humble opinion.
>
> >That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
> >small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
lot.
> >We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
budget -
> >for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
> >That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
> >almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
>
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I fully support you here.

--
Terry Dykstra (TeamSybase)
Please state PB / OS / DB versions in your post.
MySybase http://my.sybase.com/mysybase
Search Google: http://groups.google.com

"VictorReinhart" <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote in message
news:EnXmhtqyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.
I
> think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version
of the
> product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The
key
> is: he *saw* it!
>
> Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
think
> it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
databases.
> Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
and
> disappointed with this limitation.
>
> We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to
buy PB
> Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
connect to
> Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
shining
> star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
happen.
> Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
>
> Marketing happens many ways:
>
> 1) Advertising.
> Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
strategy,
> but rather, the third strategy.
>
> 2) Leading-Edge Developers
> People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should* be
*the*
> primary strategy.
>
> 3) Students
> People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should*
be
> Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
>
> 4) User Groups
> Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
>
> That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> a) Allow *full* connectivity
> b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.  Pick
> something which won't kill the project immediately.
> c) Help me here, folks!
>
> My humble opinion.
>
> >That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
> >small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
lot.
> >We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
budget -
> >for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
> >That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
> >almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
>
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Tell it Victor!  I went looking around Sybase's eshop area and about had a
cow when I saw the price difference between desktop and professional.  I
agree - why can't desktop connect to oracle?   Sure we all don't have
bizillions of $ to have Oracle enterprise.  I saw this somehere but can you
connect to oracle personal in PB (any version) now?  I'm fortunate to have
my client provide us with PB Enterprise and I certainly don't have a couple
of thousand lying around at home to buy that version for me at home.

I think more emphasis in schools would certainly help.  Give academic
pricing on PB, let em try and they'll find out how cool it can be.  What I
see in school (at least where my husband is going),  the ones to know = C++,
Java and Visual Basic.  There are classes for Oracle..gotta have some for
PB..

My 2 cents


--
Evita R. Chapa
Senior Systems Analyst
Command Technlogies, Inc

"VictorReinhart" <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote in message
news:EnXmhtqyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.
I
> think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version
of the
> product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The
key
> is: he *saw* it!
>
> Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
think
> it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
databases.
> Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
and
> disappointed with this limitation.
>
> We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to
buy PB
> Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
connect to
> Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
shining
> star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
happen.
> Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
>
> Marketing happens many ways:
>
> 1) Advertising.
> Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
strategy,
> but rather, the third strategy.
>
> 2) Leading-Edge Developers
> People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should* be
*the*
> primary strategy.
>
> 3) Students
> People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should*
be
> Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
>
> 4) User Groups
> Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
>
> That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> a) Allow *full* connectivity
> b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.  Pick
> something which won't kill the project immediately.
> c) Help me here, folks!
>
> My humble opinion.
>
> >That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
> >small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
lot.
> >We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
budget -
> >for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
> >That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
> >almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
>
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

>Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
think
>it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
databases.
>Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
and
>disappointed with this limitation.

Compared to VB, PowerBuilder already has a very good solution with desktop.
Others may not be aware but the 100.00 version of VB.net has no intigrated
access to to their report writer, Crystal Reports.  This, in my opinion will
cost MS a great deal in the long run.

Thanks, Bruce.

The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team Sybase.  Are
you inviting me?

>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so* helpful on
>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one join?
>
>http://www.teamsybase.com
>
>
>
>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>http://www.teamsybase.com
>http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

>and we need to know what you're using PB
>for now, and how you see it being used in your organizations in the future.
>Since there are many different types of users out there, there should be a
>variety of answers

I will take you at your word and tell you plainly that I am a developer who
works out of my office/home in Northern California.  I have been doing this
steadily for 15 years.  Most of my time is spent at my office writing
two-tier client/server apps.  My client(s) have the same program on their
network at their office.  Most of the clients I work with have a local area
network of about 20 work stations or less. Occasionally I go to the clients
to install or tweak what's already in place.  When there are changes (which
is frequent) I send them via PC Anywhere.  Fairly pleasant using DSL.  With
fax machine, telephones and fast broadband, it is not necessary to be on
site all that often.

One client in particular is a Truck Driving School.  The school is
headquartered in northern California, with eight campus locations in the
western part of the united states.  Though I see the time coming, at present
we do not worry about writing an application for the web.  If we could, we
would have stayed with our original applicaiton which was written in Paradox
for windows.  Because of lost market share for Paradox and because my son in
law is a PB programmer who works for Charles Schaub, I made the switch some
five years ago.  We are glad that we made the switch to something more
robust and with more horse power.

Adaptive Server Anywhere is our backend solution.  The truck school
considered going to canned software recently and found a package that did
60% of what they already have, but thought that since it was canned, it
would be substantially less expensive.  We discovered that it sells for a
half million dollars. Custom software is a necessity for this company and
good, quick and easy client/server is at the core.  In the future, if it's
really not too hard, we would like to have our satelite locations see and
enter *some* data in real time, but again that is in the future.
PowerBuilder solves a really big need for the company right now with just
client/Server.  It is my opinion that there are tens of thousands of
companies just in my immediate area that are in the same position.  That is,
they are businesses bringing in 10 to 40 million dollars a year in revenue
with custom client/server at the backbone of what they need for tracking
their data.

Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product). 

Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in. 

I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
it still would have been a bargain.

The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
that wants to stay in business). 

Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
<victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:

>Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.  I
>think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version of the
>product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
>attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The key
>is: he *saw* it!
>
>Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't think
>it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop" databases.
>Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused and
>disappointed with this limitation.
>
>We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to buy PB
>Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must* connect to
>Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the shining
>star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't happen.
>Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
>
>Marketing happens many ways:
>
>1) Advertising.
>Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary strategy,
>but rather, the third strategy.
>
>2) Leading-Edge Developers
>People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should* be *the*
>primary strategy.
>
>3) Students
>People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should* be
>Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
>
>4) User Groups
>Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
>
>That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
>a) Allow *full* connectivity
>b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.  Pick
>something which won't kill the project immediately.
>c) Help me here, folks!
>
>My humble opinion.
>
>>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
>>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a lot.
>>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing budget -
>>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
>>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
>>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
>
>
>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I think you make some really good points about the need for profitability
with regard to PB.  Sybase isn't doing this for kicks and companies that
solve serious problems with Sybase software should be willing to pay for it.
But if you drop Desktop, in my opinion, you are going to shoot yourself in
the foot.

Your greatest salesmen are developers, like myself, who are familiar with
and love the product.  There is no way I would have paid $2,000 for PB when
I first started.  It was gamble enough just to take the time to consider the
product.  Once I understood and saw it's power and benefit to myself and to
my client the story changed.  Desktop probably won't make Sybase any money
directly, but in my opinion it will make the company much more, long term.
I don't mind paying $1,200.00 dollars for drivers to big databases, but I
need something inexpensive for demonstration purposes and to help get people
into the game.


"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8f89e1.13609559@199.93.177.77...
> Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
> idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product).
>
> Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
> cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
> such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in.
>
> I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
> as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
> in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
> PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
> it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
> best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
> the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
> learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
> it still would have been a bargain.
>
> The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
> support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
> that wants to stay in business).
>
> Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
> make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
> version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
> <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
>
> >Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.
I
> >think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version
of the
> >product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> >attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The
key
> >is: he *saw* it!
> >
> >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
think
> >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
databases.
> >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
and
> >disappointed with this limitation.
> >
> >We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to
buy PB
> >Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
connect to
> >Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
shining
> >star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
happen.
> >Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
> >
> >Marketing happens many ways:
> >
> >1) Advertising.
> >Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
strategy,
> >but rather, the third strategy.
> >
> >2) Leading-Edge Developers
> >People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should*
be *the*
> >primary strategy.
> >
> >3) Students
> >People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should*
be
> >Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
> >
> >4) User Groups
> >Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
> >
> >That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> >a) Allow *full* connectivity
> >b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.
Pick
> >something which won't kill the project immediately.
> >c) Help me here, folks!
> >
> >My humble opinion.
> >
> >>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
> >>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
lot.
> >>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
budget -
> >>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
> >>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
> >>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
> >
> >
> >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>

What about longer evaluation periods?  Right now you can get a 30-day
trial - what about 90-120 days?  That would be enough time for new
development teams to get a proof of concept and build confidence that PB
will work (plus have them do enough development to "lock them in" to PB) and
also ensure that Sybase get's their revenue...



"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:d2CAUkryBHA.206@forums.sybase.com...
> I think you make some really good points about the need for profitability
> with regard to PB.  Sybase isn't doing this for kicks and companies that
> solve serious problems with Sybase software should be willing to pay for
it.
> But if you drop Desktop, in my opinion, you are going to shoot yourself in
> the foot.
>
> Your greatest salesmen are developers, like myself, who are familiar with
> and love the product.  There is no way I would have paid $2,000 for PB
when
> I first started.  It was gamble enough just to take the time to consider
the
> product.  Once I understood and saw it's power and benefit to myself and
to
> my client the story changed.  Desktop probably won't make Sybase any money
> directly, but in my opinion it will make the company much more, long term.
> I don't mind paying $1,200.00 dollars for drivers to big databases, but I
> need something inexpensive for demonstration purposes and to help get
people
> into the game.
>
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8f89e1.13609559@199.93.177.77...
> > Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
> > idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product).
> >
> > Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
> > cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
> > such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in.
> >
> > I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
> > as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
> > in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
> > PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
> > it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
> > best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
> > the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
> > learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
> > it still would have been a bargain.
> >
> > The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
> > support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
> > that wants to stay in business).
> >
> > Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
> > make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
> > version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
> > <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at
CompUSA.
> I
> > >think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive
version
> of the
> > >product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> > >attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!
The
> key
> > >is: he *saw* it!
> > >
> > >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
> think
> > >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
> databases.
> > >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are
confused
> and
> > >disappointed with this limitation.
> > >
> > >We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200
to
> buy PB
> > >Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
> connect to
> > >Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
> shining
> > >star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
> happen.
> > >Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
> > >
> > >Marketing happens many ways:
> > >
> > >1) Advertising.
> > >Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
> strategy,
> > >but rather, the third strategy.
> > >
> > >2) Leading-Edge Developers
> > >People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should*
> be *the*
> > >primary strategy.
> > >
> > >3) Students
> > >People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This
*should*
> be
> > >Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
> > >
> > >4) User Groups
> > >Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
> > >
> > >That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> > >a) Allow *full* connectivity
> > >b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.
> Pick
> > >something which won't kill the project immediately.
> > >c) Help me here, folks!
> > >
> > >My humble opinion.
> > >
> > >>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in
some
> > >>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
> lot.
> > >>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
> budget -
> > >>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net
alone.
> > >>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs.
the
> > >>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
> > >
> > >
> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >
>
>

Good idea Daniel. 30 days really isn't long enough.

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:05:06 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
<daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:

>What about longer evaluation periods?  Right now you can get a 30-day
>trial - what about 90-120 days?  That would be enough time for new
>development teams to get a proof of concept and build confidence that PB
>will work (plus have them do enough development to "lock them in" to PB) and
>also ensure that Sybase get's their revenue...
>
>
>
>"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
>news:d2CAUkryBHA.206@forums.sybase.com...
>> I think you make some really good points about the need for profitability
>> with regard to PB.  Sybase isn't doing this for kicks and companies that
>> solve serious problems with Sybase software should be willing to pay for
>it.
>> But if you drop Desktop, in my opinion, you are going to shoot yourself in
>> the foot.
>>
>> Your greatest salesmen are developers, like myself, who are familiar with
>> and love the product.  There is no way I would have paid $2,000 for PB
>when
>> I first started.  It was gamble enough just to take the time to consider
>the
>> product.  Once I understood and saw it's power and benefit to myself and
>to
>> my client the story changed.  Desktop probably won't make Sybase any money
>> directly, but in my opinion it will make the company much more, long term.
>> I don't mind paying $1,200.00 dollars for drivers to big databases, but I
>> need something inexpensive for demonstration purposes and to help get
>people
>> into the game.
>>
>>
>> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>> news:3c8f89e1.13609559@199.93.177.77...
>> > Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
>> > idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product).
>> >
>> > Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
>> > cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
>> > such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in.
>> >
>> > I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
>> > as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
>> > in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
>> > PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
>> > it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
>> > best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
>> > the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
>> > learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
>> > it still would have been a bargain.
>> >
>> > The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
>> > support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
>> > that wants to stay in business).
>> >
>> > Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
>> > make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
>> > version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>> >
>> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
>> > <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at
>CompUSA.
>> I
>> > >think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive
>version
>> of the
>> > >product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
>> > >attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!
>The
>> key
>> > >is: he *saw* it!
>> > >
>> > >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
>> think
>> > >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
>> databases.
>> > >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are
>confused
>> and
>> > >disappointed with this limitation.
>> > >
>> > >We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200
>to
>> buy PB
>> > >Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
>> connect to
>> > >Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
>> shining
>> > >star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
>> happen.
>> > >Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
>> > >
>> > >Marketing happens many ways:
>> > >
>> > >1) Advertising.
>> > >Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
>> strategy,
>> > >but rather, the third strategy.
>> > >
>> > >2) Leading-Edge Developers
>> > >People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should*
>> be *the*
>> > >primary strategy.
>> > >
>> > >3) Students
>> > >People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This
>*should*
>> be
>> > >Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
>> > >
>> > >4) User Groups
>> > >Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
>> > >
>> > >That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
>> > >a) Allow *full* connectivity
>> > >b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.
>> Pick
>> > >something which won't kill the project immediately.
>> > >c) Help me here, folks!
>> > >
>> > >My humble opinion.
>> > >
>> > >>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in
>some
>> > >>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
>> lot.
>> > >>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
>> budget -
>> > >>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net
>alone.
>> > >>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs.
>the
>> > >>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Folks like CompUSA will start stocking it (and Borders will start stocking
books on PB) when they sense there is a demand for such.  So the issue is
to create 'momentum' again, and the CompUSAs and Borders will take care of
the rest.

Bruce 'former hardware/software sales guy' Armstrong

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 23:11:18 -0800,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote: 
>IMHO PowerBuilder is never going to happen the way it should if you can not
>buy it at a regular software outlet like CompUSA.   How you do that, I don't
>know, but others do.  If Delphi can, why not us?
>
>
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I bet so too.  VB has no true report interface and what you can do for a
report certainly lacks functionality unless you have something like Crystal.

Evita
"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:JKdInCryBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
> think
> >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
> databases.
> >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
> and
> >disappointed with this limitation.
>
> Compared to VB, PowerBuilder already has a very good solution with
desktop.
> Others may not be aware but the 100.00 version of VB.net has no intigrated
> access to to their report writer, Crystal Reports.  This, in my opinion
will
> cost MS a great deal in the long run.
>
>
>
>
>

Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and so I
just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit about us.

You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both quantity and
quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase members from
January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like Jim Egan
posting over 500 messages in that period).

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote: 
>Thanks, Bruce.
>
>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team Sybase.  Are
>you inviting me?
>
>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so* helpful on
>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one join?
>>
>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>>
>>
>>
>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>>http://www.needhim.org
>
>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
<NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:

>Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and so I
>just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit about us.
>
>You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both quantity and
>quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase members from
>January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like Jim Egan
>posting over 500 messages in that period).
>
>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
> in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote: 
>>Thanks, Bruce.
>>
>>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team Sybase.  Are
>>you inviting me?
>>
>>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so* helpful on
>>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one join?
>>>
>>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>>>http://www.needhim.org
>>
>>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>
>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>http://www.teamsybase.com
>http://www.needhim.org
>
>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

And, it's so hard to get authors to commit to writing a book, when the
product comes out with a new, enhanced IDE every 12-18 months...  By the
time you understand it yourself, write the book, edit it and publish it, the
next version comes out and obviates all your work!!!

--
Paul A. Horan[TeamSybase]
VCI   Springfield, MA
www.vcisolutions.com


"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:wzxm4tryBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> Folks like CompUSA will start stocking it (and Borders will start stocking
> books on PB) when they sense there is a demand for such.  So the issue is
> to create 'momentum' again, and the CompUSAs and Borders will take care of
> the rest.
>
> Bruce 'former hardware/software sales guy' Armstrong
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 23:11:18 -0800,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote:
> >IMHO PowerBuilder is never going to happen the way it should if you can
not
> >buy it at a regular software outlet like CompUSA.   How you do that, I
don't
> >know, but others do.  If Delphi can, why not us?
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not perfectly
accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But the
list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.

terry voth
3592
roy kiesler [teamsybase]
3249
simon caldwell
2468
bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
2096
terry dykstra
1975
philip salgannik
1651
bill green[teamsybase]
1180
eric aling [teamps]
1090
eric aling [teamsybase]
1020
jim o'neil [sybase]
1015

"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
> Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
> <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>
> >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and so I
> >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit about
us.
> >
> >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both quantity
and
> >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase members
from
> >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like Jim
Egan
> >posting over 500 messages in that period).
> >
> >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
> > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> >>Thanks, Bruce.
> >>
> >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team Sybase.
Are
> >>you inviting me?
> >>
> >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
helpful on
> >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one
join?
> >>>
> >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> >>>http://www.needhim.org
> >>
> >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >
> >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >http://www.teamsybase.com
> >http://www.needhim.org
> >
> >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>

FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of TeamSybase.

--
<hopethishelps/>
Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase

"BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not perfectly
> accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But the
> list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
>
> terry voth
> 3592
> roy kiesler [teamsybase]
> 3249
> simon caldwell
> 2468
> bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
> 2096
> terry dykstra
> 1975
> philip salgannik
> 1651
> bill green[teamsybase]
> 1180
> eric aling [teamps]
> 1090
> eric aling [teamsybase]
> 1020
> jim o'neil [sybase]
> 1015
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
> > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
> > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and so
I
> > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit about
> us.
> > >
> > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
quantity
> and
> > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
members
> from
> > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like
Jim
> Egan
> > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
> > >
> > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
> > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> > >>Thanks, Bruce.
> > >>
> > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
Sybase.
> Are
> > >>you inviting me?
> > >>
> > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
> helpful on
> > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one
> join?
> > >>>
> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> > >>>http://www.needhim.org
> > >>
> > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> > >
> > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> > >http://www.teamsybase.com
> > >http://www.needhim.org
> > >
> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >
>
>

Simon Caldwell is also a member of TeamSybase, but apparently not
respected...<g>

What time period was that over?

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:26:55 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote: 
>FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of TeamSybase.
>
>--
><hopethishelps/>
>Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
>mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
>
>"BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
>> Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not perfectly
>> accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But the
>> list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
>>
>> terry voth
>> 3592
>> roy kiesler [teamsybase]
>> 3249
>> simon caldwell
>> 2468
>> bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
>> 2096
>> terry dykstra
>> 1975
>> philip salgannik
>> 1651
>> bill green[teamsybase]
>> 1180
>> eric aling [teamps]
>> 1090
>> eric aling [teamsybase]
>> 1020
>> jim o'neil [sybase]
>> 1015
>>
>> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>> news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
>> > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
>> >
>> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
>> > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and so
>I
>> > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit about
>> us.
>> > >
>> > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
>quantity
>> and
>> > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
>members
>> from
>> > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like
>Jim
>> Egan
>> > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
>> > >
>> > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
>> > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>> > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
>> > >>Thanks, Bruce.
>> > >>
>> > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
>Sybase.
>> Are
>> > >>you inviting me?
>> > >>
>> > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
>> helpful on
>> > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one
>> join?
>> > >>>
>> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>> > >>>http://www.needhim.org
>> > >>
>> > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>> > >
>> > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> > >http://www.teamsybase.com
>> > >http://www.needhim.org
>> > >
>> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Roy, I wanted to to get your glory, so I stripped the [...] stuff. Here's
the revised list.

roy kiesler                3969
terry voth                 3604
simon caldwell             2982
bruce armstrong            2945
terry dykstra              2143
eric aling                 2111
philip salgannik           1653
bill green                 1313
jim o'neil                 1113
bug                         994


"Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]" <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote in
message news:M8Oi35syBHA.206@forums.sybase.com...
> FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of
TeamSybase.
>
> --
> <hopethishelps/>
> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
> mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
>
> "BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> > Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not perfectly
> > accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But the
> > list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
> >
> > terry voth
> > 3592
> > roy kiesler [teamsybase]
> > 3249
> > simon caldwell
> > 2468
> > bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
> > 2096
> > terry dykstra
> > 1975
> > philip salgannik
> > 1651
> > bill green[teamsybase]
> > 1180
> > eric aling [teamps]
> > 1090
> > eric aling [teamsybase]
> > 1020
> > jim o'neil [sybase]
> > 1015
> >
> > "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> > news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
> > > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
> > >
> > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
> > > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and
so
> I
> > > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit
about
> > us.
> > > >
> > > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
> quantity
> > and
> > > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
> members
> > from
> > > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like
> Jim
> > Egan
> > > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
> > > >
> > > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
> > > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> > > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> > > >>Thanks, Bruce.
> > > >>
> > > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
> Sybase.
> > Are
> > > >>you inviting me?
> > > >>
> > > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
> > helpful on
> > > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does
one
> > join?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> > > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> > > >>>http://www.needhim.org
> > > >>
> > > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> > > >
> > > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> > > >http://www.teamsybase.com
> > > >http://www.needhim.org
> > > >
> > > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:tl#Yp9syBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
>
> What time period was that over?
>

All posts.

Here's the last twelve months.

terry voth                 1557
roy kiesler                 773
bug                         703
chris keating               633
simon caldwell              609
bruce armstrong             534
terry dykstra               529
jerry siegel                424
brian dick                  330
edward muesch               303

--
Later,
BEDick

ROFL! He's the Rodney Dangerfield of TeamSybase. <g>

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:41:11 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
<NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:

>Simon Caldwell is also a member of TeamSybase, but apparently not
>respected...<g>
>
>What time period was that over?
>
>On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:26:55 -0500,
> in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote: 
>>FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of TeamSybase.
>>
>>--
>><hopethishelps/>
>>Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
>>mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
>>
>>"BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
>>> Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not perfectly
>>> accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But the
>>> list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
>>>
>>> terry voth
>>> 3592
>>> roy kiesler [teamsybase]
>>> 3249
>>> simon caldwell
>>> 2468
>>> bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
>>> 2096
>>> terry dykstra
>>> 1975
>>> philip salgannik
>>> 1651
>>> bill green[teamsybase]
>>> 1180
>>> eric aling [teamps]
>>> 1090
>>> eric aling [teamsybase]
>>> 1020
>>> jim o'neil [sybase]
>>> 1015
>>>
>>> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>>> news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
>>> > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
>>> > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and so
>>I
>>> > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit about
>>> us.
>>> > >
>>> > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
>>quantity
>>> and
>>> > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
>>members
>>> from
>>> > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like
>>Jim
>>> Egan
>>> > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
>>> > >
>>> > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
>>> > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>>> > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
>>> > >>Thanks, Bruce.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
>>Sybase.
>>> Are
>>> > >>you inviting me?
>>> > >>
>>> > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
>>> helpful on
>>> > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does one
>>> join?
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>>> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>>> > >>>http://www.needhim.org
>>> > >>
>>> > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>>> > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>>> > >
>>> > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>>> > >http://www.teamsybase.com
>>> > >http://www.needhim.org
>>> > >
>>> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>>> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>http://www.teamsybase.com
>http://www.needhim.org
>
>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

He hasn't been initiated yet, and thus has not earned the team's respect
(something we aim to correct in our April meeting<vbg>)

--
<hopethishelps/>
Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase

"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:tl#Yp9syBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> Simon Caldwell is also a member of TeamSybase, but apparently not
> respected...<g>
>
> What time period was that over?
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:26:55 -0500,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> >FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of
TeamSybase.
> >
> >--
> ><hopethishelps/>
> >Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
> >mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
> >
> >"BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> >> Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not
perfectly
> >> accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But
the
> >> list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
> >>
> >> terry voth
> >> 3592
> >> roy kiesler [teamsybase]
> >> 3249
> >> simon caldwell
> >> 2468
> >> bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
> >> 2096
> >> terry dykstra
> >> 1975
> >> philip salgannik
> >> 1651
> >> bill green[teamsybase]
> >> 1180
> >> eric aling [teamps]
> >> 1090
> >> eric aling [teamsybase]
> >> 1020
> >> jim o'neil [sybase]
> >> 1015
> >>
> >> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
> >> > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
> >> > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and
so
> >I
> >> > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit
about
> >> us.
> >> > >
> >> > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
> >quantity
> >> and
> >> > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
> >members
> >> from
> >> > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like
> >Jim
> >> Egan
> >> > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
> >> > >
> >> > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
> >> > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> >> > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> >> > >>Thanks, Bruce.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
> >Sybase.
> >> Are
> >> > >>you inviting me?
> >> > >>
> >> > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
> >> helpful on
> >> > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does
one
> >> join?
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> > >>>http://www.needhim.org
> >> > >>
> >> > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >> > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >> > >
> >> > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >> > >http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> > >http://www.needhim.org
> >> > >
> >> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Of course, of course.  Then he will be a respected member, provided he
survives....<vvbg>

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:45:53 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote: 
>He hasn't been initiated yet, and thus has not earned the team's respect
>(something we aim to correct in our April meeting<vbg>)
>
>--
><hopethishelps/>
>Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
>mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
>
>"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
>wrote in message news:tl#Yp9syBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
>> Simon Caldwell is also a member of TeamSybase, but apparently not
>> respected...<g>
>>
>> What time period was that over?
>>
>> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:26:55 -0500,
>>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>> >FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of
>TeamSybase.
>> >
>> >--
>> ><hopethishelps/>
>> >Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
>> >mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
>> >
>> >"BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
>> >news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
>> >> Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not
>perfectly
>> >> accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But
>the
>> >> list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
>> >>
>> >> terry voth
>> >> 3592
>> >> roy kiesler [teamsybase]
>> >> 3249
>> >> simon caldwell
>> >> 2468
>> >> bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
>> >> 2096
>> >> terry dykstra
>> >> 1975
>> >> philip salgannik
>> >> 1651
>> >> bill green[teamsybase]
>> >> 1180
>> >> eric aling [teamps]
>> >> 1090
>> >> eric aling [teamsybase]
>> >> 1020
>> >> jim o'neil [sybase]
>> >> 1015
>> >>
>> >> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
>> >> > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
>> >> > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and
>so
>> >I
>> >> > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit
>about
>> >> us.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
>> >quantity
>> >> and
>> >> > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
>> >members
>> >> from
>> >> > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like
>> >Jim
>> >> Egan
>> >> > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
>> >> > >
>> >> > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
>> >> > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>> >> > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
>> >> > >>Thanks, Bruce.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
>> >Sybase.
>> >> Are
>> >> > >>you inviting me?
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
>> >> helpful on
>> >> > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does
>one
>> >> join?
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> >> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
>> >> > >>>http://www.needhim.org
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> >> > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> >> > >http://www.teamsybase.com
>> >> > >http://www.needhim.org
>> >> > >
>> >> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> >> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> http://www.teamsybase.com
>> http://www.needhim.org
>>
>> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Thank you.  I feel a lot better now!

--
Terry Dykstra (TeamSybase)
Please state PB / OS / DB versions in your post.
MySybase http://my.sybase.com/mysybase
Search Google: http://groups.google.com

"Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]" <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote in
message news:M8Oi35syBHA.206@forums.sybase.com...
> FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of
TeamSybase.
>
> --
> <hopethishelps/>
> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
> mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
>
> "BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> > Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not perfectly
> > accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But the
> > list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
> >
> > terry voth
> > 3592
> > roy kiesler [teamsybase]
> > 3249
> > simon caldwell
> > 2468
> > bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
> > 2096
> > terry dykstra
> > 1975
> > philip salgannik
> > 1651
> > bill green[teamsybase]
> > 1180
> > eric aling [teamps]
> > 1090
> > eric aling [teamsybase]
> > 1020
> > jim o'neil [sybase]
> > 1015
> >
> > "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> > news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
> > > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
> > >
> > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
> > > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase) and
so
> I
> > > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit
about
> > us.
> > > >
> > > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
> quantity
> > and
> > > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
> members
> > from
> > > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters like
> Jim
> > Egan
> > > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
> > > >
> > > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
> > > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> > > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> > > >>Thanks, Bruce.
> > > >>
> > > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
> Sybase.
> > Are
> > > >>you inviting me?
> > > >>
> > > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are *so*
> > helpful on
> > > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How does
one
> > join?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> > > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> > > >>>http://www.needhim.org
> > > >>
> > > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> > > >
> > > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> > > >http://www.teamsybase.com
> > > >http://www.needhim.org
> > > >
> > > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

This is on the horizon, with the first stage of this 3rd party
appserver integration (client-side) to be introduce with PB9.

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 14:14:43 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
<daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:

>What is involved with an app server supporting the VM?  (I ask this out of
>complete ignorance).  Would it be a lot of work for IBM to interact with the
>PBVM?  If Sybase supplied the VM to them, isn't it a just a bunch of CORBA
>api calls to the VM? Or is that a huge over simplification?
>
>D
>
>
>"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
>wrote in message news:rxyYAofyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
>> It would seem that the two are related, though.  If it's going to support
>> other app servers, it's going to have to compile to Java (or perhaps let
>> you script in Java).  I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for IBM or BEA to
>> support the PB VM, but if PB could create java objects, it should be the
>> end of the issue.
>>
>> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:55:43 GMT,
>>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>> Dave Fish [Team Sybase] <dfish@sybase.com> wrote:
>> >On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:36:30 -0500, "Daniel Coppersmith"
>> ><daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>I would like to see native PowerBuilder component support in other
>> >>application servers such as WebSphere.
>> >>
>> >But doesn't that application server vendor have to provide some sort
>> >of support for running the PB VM? Sybase can only do so much. If IBM
>> >doesn't allow you to call PB components (or initialize the PBVM from
>> >WebSphere like EAServer does now) how would it be workable?
>> >
>> >>Right now the biggest thing I hear when I suggest PB components is "We
>don't
>> >>want to be tied to EA Server".
>> >>
>> >>PB generating Java would be nice, but I am afraid that would be full of
>bugs
>> >>and nuances that may not be worth while.
>> >
>> >I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't want to see the issues that arose
>> >when they added compiled (C++ code) happen again.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
>> >>> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
>> >>> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>> >>>
>> >>> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
>> >>> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
>> >>> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
>> >>> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
>> >>> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>> >>>
>> >>> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
>> >>> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
>> >>> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
>> >>> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>> >>>
>> >>> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
>> >>> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
>> >>> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
>> >>> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
>> >>> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
>> >>> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
>> >>> hear others.)
>> >>>
>> >>> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
>> >>> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>> >>>
>> >>> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
>> >>> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
>> >>> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
>> >>> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
>> >>> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
>> >>> to start that change now.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> http://www.teamsybase.com
>> http://www.needhim.org
>>
>> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>
>

Dave,

I think the idea brought forward here is valid though. The product is doing
well. The feature set is improving, the quality is improving. Now there's an
apparent (I say apparent because I'm not clued up enough to be definitive)
need to establish some market penetration. How about this:

Do away with PB Desktop altogether. Sell PB Professional at a desktop-like
price. Get it into the software retailers stores, give it away at backyard
barbeques if you have to, but get the product in front of as many developers
as possible. Use the ePeople approach for paid-support (reduce the price if
necessary), so as to not overload the tech-support lines with folks who a)
want to know how to open the box and b) calling to complain about the price
of tech support. The concept has to do with a longer-term plan. Once the
product gains momentum, the Enterprise Edition capabilities (web-targets,
web-services, app-server integration, team development, Enterprise class
database access etc), will promote the product better than 10 marketing
campaigns.

If you want to keep desktop around, then don't produce it as a product, but
just as a CD. Put the thing in PC Magazine and PC Week (and such other
high-distribution magazines), and just get the product out in front of
people.

You need more market penetration, and not just to the Fortune 100. They
already know about it.


regards,
Bill




"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8f89e1.13609559@199.93.177.77...
> Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
> idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product).
>
> Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
> cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
> such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in.
>
> I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
> as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
> in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
> PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
> it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
> best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
> the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
> learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
> it still would have been a bargain.
>
> The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
> support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
> that wants to stay in business).
>
> Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
> make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
> version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
> <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
>
> >Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.
I
> >think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version
of the
> >product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> >attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The
key
> >is: he *saw* it!
> >
> >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
think
> >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
databases.
> >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
and
> >disappointed with this limitation.
> >
> >We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to
buy PB
> >Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
connect to
> >Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
shining
> >star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
happen.
> >Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
> >
> >Marketing happens many ways:
> >
> >1) Advertising.
> >Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
strategy,
> >but rather, the third strategy.
> >
> >2) Leading-Edge Developers
> >People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should*
be *the*
> >primary strategy.
> >
> >3) Students
> >People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should*
be
> >Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
> >
> >4) User Groups
> >Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
> >
> >That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> >a) Allow *full* connectivity
> >b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.
Pick
> >something which won't kill the project immediately.
> >c) Help me here, folks!
> >
> >My humble opinion.
> >
> >>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
> >>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
lot.
> >>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
budget -
> >>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
> >>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
> >>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
> >
> >
> >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>

Woody,
You are describing most of my clients, although I have also provided
services to Banks and Insurance companies.
In Asia/Pacific the market you describe used to be serviced by the IBM S/3x
and then the AS/400 up until about 1993. I moved from that technology to PB
in 1991 (1.0A ) and I loved the fact that I could deliver the better
interface with the strength of the database (usually Sybase SQL Server at
that stage).  After the paradigm shift from 3GL to events and objects I
found myself pretty productive. Now we have had another paradigm shift into
Web based application delivery.
I find myself regretting that the Web based stuff can't look and act as good
as standard Windows but I guess thats the architecture, not the Tool.
I do think I'd like to use the opportunity to try shipping some software
products on Linux though. I'm familiar with unix because I have administered
databases for the last 10 years along with application development and we
are moving our Web servers and mail servers to Linux. Why can't we have a
Linux version of PB?

Brett

Computers can now keep a man's every transgression recorded in a permanent
memory bank, duplicating with complex programming and intricate wiring a
feat his wife handles quite well without fuss or fanfare.
Lane Olinghouse ( - ____)
In "Reader's Digest," Sep 1993
=

:-p

--
All views expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily those of
my employer


"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:tl#Yp9syBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> Simon Caldwell is also a member of TeamSybase, but apparently not
> respected...<g>
>
://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I'll just have to wait for your respect as I can't make the meeting due to
work commitments :(

--
All views expressed in this message are my own and not necessarily those of
my employer


"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:ybeOWptyBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> Of course, of course.  Then he will be a respected member, provided he
> survives....<vvbg>
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:45:53 -0500,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> >He hasn't been initiated yet, and thus has not earned the team's respect
> >(something we aim to correct in our April meeting<vbg>)
> >
> >--
> ><hopethishelps/>
> >Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
> >mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
> >
> >"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
> >wrote in message news:tl#Yp9syBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> >> Simon Caldwell is also a member of TeamSybase, but apparently not
> >> respected...<g>
> >>
> >> What time period was that over?
> >>
> >> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:26:55 -0500,
> >>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> >> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> >> >FWIW, Terry Voth and Terry Tykstra are both respected members of
> >TeamSybase.
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> ><hopethishelps/>
> >> >Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
> >> >mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
> >> >
> >> >"BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
> >> >news:bC8wa2syBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> >> >> Here's the top ten from the general newsgroup. The list is not
> >perfectly
> >> >> accurate, because people have changed their signature over time. But
> >the
> >> >> list still gives you an idea of who the motor-mouths are <g>.
> >> >>
> >> >> terry voth
> >> >> 3592
> >> >> roy kiesler [teamsybase]
> >> >> 3249
> >> >> simon caldwell
> >> >> 2468
> >> >> bruce armstrong [teamsybase]
> >> >> 2096
> >> >> terry dykstra
> >> >> 1975
> >> >> philip salgannik
> >> >> 1651
> >> >> bill green[teamsybase]
> >> >> 1180
> >> >> eric aling [teamps]
> >> >> 1090
> >> >> eric aling [teamsybase]
> >> >> 1020
> >> >> jim o'neil [sybase]
> >> >> 1015
> >> >>
> >> >> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:3c8fa7fa.21314308@199.93.177.77...
> >> >> > Jim is a superstar! He's out of control!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:41:38 -0500, "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
> >> >> > <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > >Actually, you asked about TeamPowersoft (now called TeamSybase)
and
> >so
> >> >I
> >> >> > >just gave you a link to something that would explain a little bit
> >about
> >> >> us.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >You have to be *real* active to actually get an invite, and both
> >> >quantity
> >> >> and
> >> >> > >quality are important.  The average message count for TeamSybase
> >> >members
> >> >> from
> >> >> > >January 1st of this year to today is 165 posts (with characters
like
> >> >Jim
> >> >> Egan
> >> >> > >posting over 500 messages in that period).
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:00:25 -0500,
> >> >> > > in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> >> >> > >VictorReinhart <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >>Thanks, Bruce.
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >>The page says someone must invite you to become a member of Team
> >> >Sybase.
> >> >> Are
> >> >> > >>you inviting me?
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >>>>I'd like to know more about Team PowerSoft.  These folks are
*so*
> >> >> helpful on
> >> >> > >>>>the newsgroups.  What does Sybase do for these folks?  How
does
> >one
> >> >> join?
> >> >> > >>>
> >> >> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> >> > >>>
> >> >> > >>>
> >> >> > >>>
> >> >> > >>>Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >> >> > >>>http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> >> > >>>http://www.needhim.org
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >>---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >> >> > >>http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >> >> > >http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> >> > >http://www.needhim.org
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >> >> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >> http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> http://www.needhim.org
> >>
> >> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I LIKE that idea..Yeay Bill!

After reading through this never-ending thread(and liking it :-)), the
phrase is 'exposure, exposure, exposure'.  I realize Sybase doesn't have the
$$$ that Microsoft has but you gotta start somewhere. Web is a big deal here
in places, but our focus for our development is client-server and
functionality for the user.

A former instructor of mine sent me a Microsoft promo (get VB.Net for $109 -
they're giving it away cause they want people to use it).  Microsoft has
tapped the schools, why not Sybase?

Also, we're using the heck out of PFC, so please don't get rid of it :-).
It has really saved us time.  I wish maybe some things were easier to learn,
but that's a given with any new language.

Another 2 cents


--
Evita R. Chapa
Senior Systems Analyst
Command Technlogies, Inc


"Bill Green[TeamSybase]" <bill.green@teamsybase.com> wrote in message
news:JHUuVDwyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> Dave,
>
> I think the idea brought forward here is valid though. The product is
doing
> well. The feature set is improving, the quality is improving. Now there's
an
> apparent (I say apparent because I'm not clued up enough to be definitive)
> need to establish some market penetration. How about this:
>
> Do away with PB Desktop altogether. Sell PB Professional at a desktop-like
> price. Get it into the software retailers stores, give it away at backyard
> barbeques if you have to, but get the product in front of as many
developers
> as possible. Use the ePeople approach for paid-support (reduce the price
if
> necessary), so as to not overload the tech-support lines with folks who a)
> want to know how to open the box and b) calling to complain about the
price
> of tech support. The concept has to do with a longer-term plan. Once the
> product gains momentum, the Enterprise Edition capabilities (web-targets,
> web-services, app-server integration, team development, Enterprise class
> database access etc), will promote the product better than 10 marketing
> campaigns.
>
> If you want to keep desktop around, then don't produce it as a product,
but
> just as a CD. Put the thing in PC Magazine and PC Week (and such other
> high-distribution magazines), and just get the product out in front of
> people.
>
> You need more market penetration, and not just to the Fortune 100. They
> already know about it.
>
>
> regards,
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8f89e1.13609559@199.93.177.77...
> > Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
> > idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product).
> >
> > Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
> > cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
> > such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in.
> >
> > I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
> > as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
> > in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
> > PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
> > it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
> > best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
> > the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
> > learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
> > it still would have been a bargain.
> >
> > The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
> > support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
> > that wants to stay in business).
> >
> > Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
> > make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
> > version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
> > <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at
CompUSA.
> I
> > >think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive
version
> of the
> > >product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> > >attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!
The
> key
> > >is: he *saw* it!
> > >
> > >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
> think
> > >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
> databases.
> > >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are
confused
> and
> > >disappointed with this limitation.
> > >
> > >We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200
to
> buy PB
> > >Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
> connect to
> > >Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
> shining
> > >star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
> happen.
> > >Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
> > >
> > >Marketing happens many ways:
> > >
> > >1) Advertising.
> > >Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
> strategy,
> > >but rather, the third strategy.
> > >
> > >2) Leading-Edge Developers
> > >People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should*
> be *the*
> > >primary strategy.
> > >
> > >3) Students
> > >People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This
*should*
> be
> > >Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
> > >
> > >4) User Groups
> > >Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
> > >
> > >That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> > >a) Allow *full* connectivity
> > >b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.
> Pick
> > >something which won't kill the project immediately.
> > >c) Help me here, folks!
> > >
> > >My humble opinion.
> > >
> > >>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in
some
> > >>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
> lot.
> > >>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
> budget -
> > >>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net
alone.
> > >>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs.
the
> > >>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
> > >
> > >
> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >
>
>

"Edward Muesch" <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:C#OKkJhyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> I believe you mean to suggest that that was your .02 dollars worth <g>
>
> Free PB Desktop with limited Web Datawindow.  Place limitations that
> wouldn't stop the little guy but only prevent the Corporate client from
> being able to use it.

  Borland does this with their products. They have "personal" versions of
their apps that can't be used for commercial purposes.
Would that work?

--
Mike Swaim
Michael.Swaim@UBSWenergy.com
Disclaimer: Yeah, like I speak for <employer>.

"Woody" <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
news:xgl#7LfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> It seems to me, however, that things are done in VB.net, seamlessly, that
> require the PFC in PowerBuilder.  All of it's usefull ness not
withstanding,
> I have always felt like the PFC was a platform on top of a platform, and
too
> hard to learn.  For simple client/server things, the PFC put a level of
> complexity into the mix that beginners just aren't going to use.
<SNIP>
> There is no good tool for Client/Server right now.  Perhaps Delphi, but I
> worry about Borland's stability.

(Aside: Borland's quite profitable these days.)
  The problem with Delphi from a C/S perspective is that out of the box you
have to use either the Borland Database Engine or the DataSnap componants to
talk to your server. The BDE's annoying to use, and will occasionally refuse
to work (forcing you to close all of your other applications, until it can
lock the memory it wants), and the DataSnap componants are just plain user
hostile. Many people use third party software to talk to their databases
instead.

  Currently in PowerBuilder, you have the PFC sitting on top of black box
classes like windows, menus and nvos. What I'd like to do is extend
powerscript a bit, and implement all of the base classes in powerscript.
(This is more or less the way that the Delphi, C# and Java IDEs work.) This
would require seperating the development team into a compiler group and a
library group, and I think could lead to greater stability. I'd also
distribute library source with the enterprise version.
  I'd also add support for fast datatypes. Currently, PB datatypes are
nullable, which is great for talking to the database, but sucks if you're
doing math or loops. Fast datatypes wouldn't be nullable, but would allow
you to do the math directly on the CPU.

  Is that radical enough?

--
Mike Swaim
Michael.Swaim@UBSWenergy.com
Disclaimer: Yeah, like I speak for <employer>.

Sue Dunnell wrote: 
>We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10 years old,
>and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is true for
>any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
>programming environment before the many languages and standards we have today
>existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in progress, but
>it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy new
>feature to write about like XML is.

Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the PB
developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new technology in a
short skirt than taking care of business on the home front. 

In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder to slip
into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds of most
people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of PB on
a box they built from scratch. 

I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the "infrastructure" will
not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I had to
stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be directly
attributed to PB's usability problems. 


Bill Norton
Austin, TX

But that's really true for all the big IDE's.  MS books (even non-MS Press)
seem to come out weeks or even months before the product ships.
Case-in-point; .Net books are all over the place.  This allows the largest
possible window of marketability to the author/publisher.  The IDE is
usually (although not always) finalized long before final Beta.  The last
couple of Beta versions just get the kinks out of the internals.

-EGM


Paul Horan[TeamSybase] <paulhATvcisolutionsDOTcom> wrote in message
news:39#c4dsyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> And, it's so hard to get authors to commit to writing a book, when the
> product comes out with a new, enhanced IDE every 12-18 months...  By the
> time you understand it yourself, write the book, edit it and publish it,
the
> next version comes out and obviates all your work!!!
>
> --
> Paul A. Horan[TeamSybase]
> VCI   Springfield, MA
> www.vcisolutions.com
>
>
> "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
> wrote in message news:wzxm4tryBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> > Folks like CompUSA will start stocking it (and Borders will start
stocking
> > books on PB) when they sense there is a demand for such.  So the issue
is
> > to create 'momentum' again, and the CompUSAs and Borders will take care
of
> > the rest.
> >
> > Bruce 'former hardware/software sales guy' Armstrong
> >
> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 23:11:18 -0800,
> >  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> > Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote:
> > >IMHO PowerBuilder is never going to happen the way it should if you can
> not
> > >buy it at a regular software outlet like CompUSA.   How you do that, I
> don't
> > >know, but others do.  If Delphi can, why not us?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> > http://www.teamsybase.com
> > http://www.needhim.org
> >
> > ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>
>

"Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...

> snip <

> and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
> endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of
PB on
> a box they built from scratch.

I knew the TeamSybase guys wore propeller-beanies, but I didn't know they
all ran Linux. <bg>

> snip <


Sorry... I had to be cheesy.

Cheesy but cute..Hey I like unix...:-)

By the way, is it time for 'PB's Future-Part II' yet?? I'm starting to have
a hard time tracking the thread..

Just a suggestion

Evita
"Bug" <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iD9mZD5yBHA.244@forums.sybase.com...
> "Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
>
> > snip <
>
> > and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
> > endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version
of
> PB on
> > a box they built from scratch.
>
> I knew the TeamSybase guys wore propeller-beanies, but I didn't know they
> all ran Linux. <bg>
>
> > snip <
>
>
> Sorry... I had to be cheesy.
>
>

The solution to the usability problem may be to "eat your own dog food". By
which I mean use PB for Sybase's own internal business applications.
Besides, maybe you would get to match Oracle's claim of saving a million
dollars by using their own applications.

Bill Norton wrote in message <8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com>...
>Sue Dunnell wrote:
>>We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10 years
old,
>>and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is true
for
>>any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
>>programming environment before the many languages and standards we have
today
>>existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in progress,
but
>>it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy new
>>feature to write about like XML is.
>
>Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the PB
>developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new technology
in a
>short skirt than taking care of business on the home front.
>
>In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder to
slip
>into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds of
most
>people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
>endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of
PB on
>a box they built from scratch.
>
>I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the "infrastructure"
will
>not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I had
to
>stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be
directly
>attributed to PB's usability problems.
>
>
>Bill Norton
>Austin, TX

Bill,

I don't know why you read what you read between the lines -- having known
Sue and the PB development team for a while, the effort to rebuild the
infrastructure are meant to support future product enhancements that people
are requesting today(!) but are simply not possible using the current
implementation of either the PBVM, the datawindow engine, etc.

If PowerBuilder was to support .NET, the compiler would have to be modified
to emit MSIL -- that's infrastructure.
If WebSphere was to host PB NVO, the PBVM would likely have to be modified
to support WebSphere-specific interfaces -- that's infrastructure.

--
<hopethishelps/>
Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase

"Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> Sue Dunnell wrote:
> >We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10 years
old,
> >and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is true
for
> >any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
> >programming environment before the many languages and standards we have
today
> >existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in
progress, but
> >it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy new
> >feature to write about like XML is.
>
> Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the
PB
> developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new
technology in a
> short skirt than taking care of business on the home front.
>
> In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder to
slip
> into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds
of most
> people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it
is
> endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of
PB on
> a box they built from scratch.
>
> I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the "infrastructure"
will
> not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I had
to
> stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be
directly
> attributed to PB's usability problems.
>
>
> Bill Norton
> Austin, TX

Eating your own dog food is one of my favorite expressions Jerry. I
truely believe a company must do that if they want to be successful.
Sybase has a lot of applications written in PowerBuilder, but they are
not written by the PB development team. It would be great if they did
have to write apps using PB, but then when would they find time to
support and enhance PB?

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:57:16 -0500, "Jerry Siegel"
<jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote:

>The solution to the usability problem may be to "eat your own dog food". By
>which I mean use PB for Sybase's own internal business applications.
>Besides, maybe you would get to match Oracle's claim of saving a million
>dollars by using their own applications.
>
>Bill Norton wrote in message <8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com>...
>>Sue Dunnell wrote:
>>>We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10 years
>old,
>>>and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is true
>for
>>>any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
>>>programming environment before the many languages and standards we have
>today
>>>existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in progress,
>but
>>>it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy new
>>>feature to write about like XML is.
>>
>>Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the PB
>>developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new technology
>in a
>>short skirt than taking care of business on the home front.
>>
>>In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder to
>slip
>>into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds of
>most
>>people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
>>endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of
>PB on
>>a box they built from scratch.
>>
>>I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the "infrastructure"
>will
>>not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I had
>to
>>stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be
>directly
>>attributed to PB's usability problems.
>>
>>
>>Bill Norton
>>Austin, TX
>
>

You mean PB isn't so incredibly productive that they would have lots of
time? <bg>
Seriously, tool writers need a different mind-set than application writers
[btdt] as well as a different tool set. Nothing helps usability like talking
to the end user.  If you are a toolsmith, that would be an application
developer. Maybe management could get some people from the two groups to
have lunch together once a week? Or would that take a plane ride?

Dave Fish [Team Sybase] wrote in message
<3c9106b9.24650014@199.93.177.77>...
>Eating your own dog food is one of my favorite expressions Jerry. I
>truely believe a company must do that if they want to be successful.
>Sybase has a lot of applications written in PowerBuilder, but they are
>not written by the PB development team. It would be great if they did
>have to write apps using PB, but then when would they find time to
>support and enhance PB?
>
>Regards,
>Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
>On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:57:16 -0500, "Jerry Siegel"
><jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote:
>
>>The solution to the usability problem may be to "eat your own dog food".
By
>>which I mean use PB for Sybase's own internal business applications.
>>Besides, maybe you would get to match Oracle's claim of saving a million
>>dollars by using their own applications.
>>
>>Bill Norton wrote in message <8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com>...
>>>Sue Dunnell wrote:
>>>>We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10
years
>>old,
>>>>and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is
true
>>for
>>>>any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
>>>>programming environment before the many languages and standards we have
>>today
>>>>existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in
progress,
>>but
>>>>it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy
new
>>>>feature to write about like XML is.
>>>
>>>Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the
PB
>>>developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new
technology
>>in a
>>>short skirt than taking care of business on the home front.
>>>
>>>In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder
to
>>slip
>>>into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds
of
>>most
>>>people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it
is
>>>endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of
>>PB on
>>>a box they built from scratch.
>>>
>>>I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the "infrastructure"
>>will
>>>not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I
had
>>to
>>>stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be
>>directly
>>>attributed to PB's usability problems.
>>>
>>>
>>>Bill Norton
>>>Austin, TX
>>
>>
>

The revenue for the "let's get it onto everybody's desktop" version isn't
supposed to support development efforts.  It's supposed to help the product
with exposure.  Give the development community the ability to check it out
and that is what actually "bubbles-up" (as I recently heard it put) to
management.  It creates buzz both in the corporate world and in the trade
papers.  THAT is what eventually gets the orders in for the Enterprise
version and THAT is where the revenue comes from.

-EGM

Dave Fish [Team Sybase] <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8f89e1.13609559@199.93.177.77...
> Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
> idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product).
>
> Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
> cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
> such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in.
>
> I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
> as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
> in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
> PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
> it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
> best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
> the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
> learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
> it still would have been a bargain.
>
> The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
> support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
> that wants to stay in business).
>
> Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
> make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
> version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
> <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
>
> >Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at CompUSA.
I
> >think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive version
of the
> >product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> >attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!  The
key
> >is: he *saw* it!
> >
> >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
think
> >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
databases.
> >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are confused
and
> >disappointed with this limitation.
> >
> >We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200 to
buy PB
> >Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
connect to
> >Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
shining
> >star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
happen.
> >Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
> >
> >Marketing happens many ways:
> >
> >1) Advertising.
> >Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
strategy,
> >but rather, the third strategy.
> >
> >2) Leading-Edge Developers
> >People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should*
be *the*
> >primary strategy.
> >
> >3) Students
> >People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This *should*
be
> >Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
> >
> >4) User Groups
> >Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
> >
> >That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> >a) Allow *full* connectivity
> >b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.
Pick
> >something which won't kill the project immediately.
> >c) Help me here, folks!
> >
> >My humble opinion.
> >
> >>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in some
> >>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
lot.
> >>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
budget -
> >>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net alone.
> >>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs. the
> >>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
> >
> >
> >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>

The CD in shrink-wrapped (or rain-bags as I like to call them) magazines is
a BRILLIANT idea.  Now if somebody can get some smelling-salts for the
marketing team we can continue...

-EGM

Bill Green[TeamSybase] <bill.green@teamsybase.com> wrote in message
news:JHUuVDwyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> Dave,
>
> I think the idea brought forward here is valid though. The product is
doing
> well. The feature set is improving, the quality is improving. Now there's
an
> apparent (I say apparent because I'm not clued up enough to be definitive)
> need to establish some market penetration. How about this:
>
> Do away with PB Desktop altogether. Sell PB Professional at a desktop-like
> price. Get it into the software retailers stores, give it away at backyard
> barbeques if you have to, but get the product in front of as many
developers
> as possible. Use the ePeople approach for paid-support (reduce the price
if
> necessary), so as to not overload the tech-support lines with folks who a)
> want to know how to open the box and b) calling to complain about the
price
> of tech support. The concept has to do with a longer-term plan. Once the
> product gains momentum, the Enterprise Edition capabilities (web-targets,
> web-services, app-server integration, team development, Enterprise class
> database access etc), will promote the product better than 10 marketing
> campaigns.
>
> If you want to keep desktop around, then don't produce it as a product,
but
> just as a CD. Put the thing in PC Magazine and PC Week (and such other
> high-distribution magazines), and just get the product out in front of
> people.
>
> You need more market penetration, and not just to the Fortune 100. They
> already know about it.
>
>
> regards,
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3c8f89e1.13609559@199.93.177.77...
> > Well to be honest with  you, I don't know if PB Desktop was a good
> > idea to begin with. (Line extensions rarely help a product).
> >
> > Honestly, the revenue from a low cost product like PB Desktop won't
> > cover the R&D needed to move PB forward, and the cost of supporting
> > such a product probably outweighs the revenue it brings in.
> >
> > I know people don't like to pay a lot of money for things, but really
> > as professional software developers, we need to be willing to invest
> > in our tool set. Back in 1993 I paid over $2,000 for a copy of
> > PowerBuilder Standard. I hated to part with the money, but I knew that
> > it was an investment in my career and my future. That was one of the
> > best investments I have ever made. If I could have seen 5-8 years into
> > the future to see where I would be financially and career wise after
> > learning PowerBuilder I would have paid five times as much for PB and
> > it still would have been a bargain.
> >
> > The bottom line is, if PB doesn't make money for Sybase, they won't
> > support it and invest in it. That is true of any company (at least one
> > that wants to stay in business).
> >
> > Sybase is making the investment in PowerBuilder expecting that it will
> > make money for them. Making PB Desktop more like the Enterprise
> > version would, in my opinion, seriously erode PB revenue.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:23:16 -0500, "VictorReinhart"
> > <victora.reinhart@phs.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Back in its heyday, I saw PowerBuilder Desktop on the shelves at
CompUSA.
> I
> > >think Sybase needs to adopt the MS strategy:  Get an inexpensive
version
> of the
> > >product into many people's hands.  It will "bubble up" to management's
> > >attention.  I just showed PB today to someone here, and he loves it!
The
> key
> > >is: he *saw* it!
> > >
> > >Also, I think Sybase should re-think the PB Desktop strategy.  I don't
> think
> > >it's a good idea to limit the product to only connect to "desktop"
> databases.
> > >Doing that makes no sense.  Read the posts.  A lot of people are
confused
> and
> > >disappointed with this limitation.
> > >
> > >We need to encourage the pioneers at big companies to spend about $200
to
> buy PB
> > >Desktop on their own, then have success using the product.  It *must*
> connect to
> > >Oracle, Sybase, SQL Server!  People need to see the DataWindow -- the
> shining
> > >star of PB.  If they can't connect to their Oracle Database, that won't
> happen.
> > >Please, please, please, limit the product another way.
> > >
> > >Marketing happens many ways:
> > >
> > >1) Advertising.
> > >Important, but very expensive.  This should *not* be Sybase's primary
> strategy,
> > >but rather, the third strategy.
> > >
> > >2) Leading-Edge Developers
> > >People who take a chance on the $200 PB box at Comp USA.  This *should*
> be *the*
> > >primary strategy.
> > >
> > >3) Students
> > >People who get PB almost free at school, and take a class.  This
*should*
> be
> > >Sybase's secondary marketing strategy.
> > >
> > >4) User Groups
> > >Wine and dine your user group presidents.  We need more of them.
> > >
> > >That said, I would suggest we limit PB Desktop in other ways:
> > >a) Allow *full* connectivity
> > >b) Disable some advanced feature, such as Treeviews, or Dynamic SQL.
> Pick
> > >something which won't kill the project immediately.
> > >c) Help me here, folks!
> > >
> > >My humble opinion.
> > >
> > >>That being said, I am lucky(???) enough to have gotten involved in
some
> > >>small degree with the marketing folks at Sybase, and they are doing a
> lot.
> > >>We might not all notice it, one reason being that their marketing
> budget -
> > >>for all products - is less than Microsoft plans to spend on .Net
alone.
> > >>That's the benefit of having a market capitilization near $300B vs.
the
> > >>almost $2B for Sybase. Nothing you can do about that.
> > >
> > >
> > >---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> > >http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >
>
>

No, some of us link Solaris<G>.

Oh yeah, I'll go on record as saying I've never worn my beany...and never
will<G>

--
Larry Cermak [Team Sybase]
Branick Consulting, Inc.
www.branick-inc.com
Web DataWindow eBook


"Bug" <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iD9mZD5yBHA.244@forums.sybase.com...
> "Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
>
> > snip <
>
> > and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
> > endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version
of
> PB on
> > a box they built from scratch.
>
> I knew the TeamSybase guys wore propeller-beanies, but I didn't know they
> all ran Linux. <bg>
>
> > snip <
>
>
> Sorry... I had to be cheesy.
>
>

As excited as I have been about this thread, I was doubly excited to
actually hear Sue promising exactly what I have wanted PB to develop into...
a more open architecture which works with others in an abstract manner.
Which is techno-babble (no offense, I'm just psyched) for "Just keep doing
what you're doing and we'll take care of making it work with what you need
it to work with".  After hearing several people say "Well, how would we
implement that exactly?", this is indeed good to hear.

Of course we developers will have to tweak a few things and maybe write the
abstract layer or implement the interfaces into our apps, but it is nice to
hear about a commitment to WebSphere and WebLogic.  This has, in my
experience, been most often the reason for management getting the idea that
PB was not scalable.

-EGM

Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] <SPAM_FREE_roy.kiesler@teamsybase.com> wrote in
message news:5$MirR5yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> Bill,
>
> I don't know why you read what you read between the lines -- having known
> Sue and the PB development team for a while, the effort to rebuild the
> infrastructure are meant to support future product enhancements that
people
> are requesting today(!) but are simply not possible using the current
> implementation of either the PBVM, the datawindow engine, etc.
>
> If PowerBuilder was to support .NET, the compiler would have to be
modified
> to emit MSIL -- that's infrastructure.
> If WebSphere was to host PB NVO, the PBVM would likely have to be modified
> to support WebSphere-specific interfaces -- that's infrastructure.
>
> --
> <hopethishelps/>
> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
> mySybase -- http://www.sybase.com/mysybase
>
> "Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> > Sue Dunnell wrote:
> > >We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10
years
> old,
> > >and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is
true
> for
> > >any software product; PB was originally developed to address a
different
> > >programming environment before the many languages and standards we have
> today
> > >existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in
> progress, but
> > >it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy
new
> > >feature to write about like XML is.
> >
> > Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the
> PB
> > developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new
> technology in a
> > short skirt than taking care of business on the home front.
> >
> > In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder
to
> slip
> > into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds
> of most
> > people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it
> is
> > endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version
of
> PB on
> > a box they built from scratch.
> >
> > I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the
"infrastructure"
> will
> > not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I
had
> to
> > stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be
> directly
> > attributed to PB's usability problems.
> >
> >
> > Bill Norton
> > Austin, TX
>
>

Sometimes my girlfriend makes me wear mine... but we won't go there. <g>

Larry Cermak [Team Sybase] <lcermak@branick-inc.com> wrote in message
news:DQFkPY6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
> No, some of us link Solaris<G>.
>
> Oh yeah, I'll go on record as saying I've never worn my beany...and never
> will<G>
>
> --
> Larry Cermak [Team Sybase]
> Branick Consulting, Inc.
> www.branick-inc.com
> Web DataWindow eBook
>
>
> "Bug" <fenterbug@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:iD9mZD5yBHA.244@forums.sybase.com...
> > "Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> >
> > > snip <
> >
> > > and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
> > > endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version
> of
> > PB on
> > > a box they built from scratch.
> >
> > I knew the TeamSybase guys wore propeller-beanies, but I didn't know
they
> > all ran Linux. <bg>
> >
> > > snip <
> >
> >
> > Sorry... I had to be cheesy.
> >
> >
>
>

If cleaning up the infrastructure means a product that is more stable, has
fewer bugs, and is easier to fit with new features, that surely is a selling
point. Or have you not read the reviews of the gamma [that's the next Greek
letter after beta] version of VS.NET?
As for XML, before too long it's going to be mandatory for any application
that wants to talk to another, as much an expected part of the scenery as IP
and SQL. Do it, and do it right.

Bill Norton wrote in message <8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com>...
>Sue Dunnell wrote:
>>We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10 years
old,
>>and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is true
for
>>any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
>>programming environment before the many languages and standards we have
today
>>existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in progress,
but
>>it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy new
>>feature to write about like XML is.
>
>Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the PB
>developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new technology
in a
>short skirt than taking care of business on the home front.
>
>In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder to
slip
>into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds of
most
>people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
>endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of
PB on
>a box they built from scratch.
>
>I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the "infrastructure"
will
>not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I had
to
>stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be
directly
>attributed to PB's usability problems.
>
>
>Bill Norton
>Austin, TX

Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] wrote: 

>I don't know why you read what you read between the lines -- having known
>Sue and the PB development team for a while, the effort to rebuild the
>infrastructure are meant to support future product enhancements that people
>are requesting today(!) but are simply not possible using the current
>implementation of either the PBVM, the datawindow engine, etc.

Well, it's possible that my interpretation of the word "infrastructure" was
incorrect. Maybe it was just wishful thinking on my part that someone at PB had
even noticed that there are usability problems.

So, Sue, let me ask you directly, is the usability of PB even a concern at all
to you?


Bill Norton
Austin, TX

Agreed.  Most of the folks who write books on these products start writing
with the first beta.  Sometimes it shows, like when features are pulled at
the last minute or the IDE is changed at the last minute, and it's too late
to stop the book going out with infromation based on a late beta.  That's
just the way it goes.

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:33:50 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Edward Muesch <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote: 
>But that's really true for all the big IDE's.  MS books (even non-MS Press)
>seem to come out weeks or even months before the product ships.
>Case-in-point; .Net books are all over the place.  This allows the largest
>possible window of marketability to the author/publisher.  The IDE is
>usually (although not always) finalized long before final Beta.  The last
>couple of Beta versions just get the kinks out of the internals.
>
>-EGM
>
>
>Paul Horan[TeamSybase] <paulhATvcisolutionsDOTcom> wrote in message
>news:39#c4dsyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
>> And, it's so hard to get authors to commit to writing a book, when the
>> product comes out with a new, enhanced IDE every 12-18 months...  By the
>> time you understand it yourself, write the book, edit it and publish it,
>the
>> next version comes out and obviates all your work!!!
>>
>> --
>> Paul A. Horan[TeamSybase]
>> VCI   Springfield, MA
>> www.vcisolutions.com
>>
>>
>> "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
>> wrote in message news:wzxm4tryBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
>> > Folks like CompUSA will start stocking it (and Borders will start
>stocking
>> > books on PB) when they sense there is a demand for such.  So the issue
>is
>> > to create 'momentum' again, and the CompUSAs and Borders will take care
>of
>> > the rest.
>> >
>> > Bruce 'former hardware/software sales guy' Armstrong
>> >
>> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 23:11:18 -0800,
>> >  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
>> > Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote:
>> > >IMHO PowerBuilder is never going to happen the way it should if you can
>> not
>> > >buy it at a regular software outlet like CompUSA.   How you do that, I
>> don't
>> > >know, but others do.  If Delphi can, why not us?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
>> > http://www.teamsybase.com
>> > http://www.needhim.org
>> >
>> > ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
>> > http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
>>
>>
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Strangely enough though, there are usually mentions in the text about the
"iffy-ness" of a feature being available in the final release.  I'm not sure
if the authors have an inside-track into team meetings or if they just pay
close attention to all the pre-release reviews from the tech-publishing
industry veterans who almost always do.

-EGM

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase] <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:s6dISn6yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> Agreed.  Most of the folks who write books on these products start writing
> with the first beta.  Sometimes it shows, like when features are pulled at
> the last minute or the IDE is changed at the last minute, and it's too
late
> to stop the book going out with infromation based on a late beta.  That's
> just the way it goes.
>
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:33:50 -0500,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Edward Muesch <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >But that's really true for all the big IDE's.  MS books (even non-MS
Press)
> >seem to come out weeks or even months before the product ships.
> >Case-in-point; .Net books are all over the place.  This allows the
largest
> >possible window of marketability to the author/publisher.  The IDE is
> >usually (although not always) finalized long before final Beta.  The last
> >couple of Beta versions just get the kinks out of the internals.
> >
> >-EGM
> >
> >
> >Paul Horan[TeamSybase] <paulhATvcisolutionsDOTcom> wrote in message
> >news:39#c4dsyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> >> And, it's so hard to get authors to commit to writing a book, when the
> >> product comes out with a new, enhanced IDE every 12-18 months...  By
the
> >> time you understand it yourself, write the book, edit it and publish
it,
> >the
> >> next version comes out and obviates all your work!!!
> >>
> >> --
> >> Paul A. Horan[TeamSybase]
> >> VCI   Springfield, MA
> >> www.vcisolutions.com
> >>
> >>
> >> "Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]"
<NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
> >> wrote in message news:wzxm4tryBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> >> > Folks like CompUSA will start stocking it (and Borders will start
> >stocking
> >> > books on PB) when they sense there is a demand for such.  So the
issue
> >is
> >> > to create 'momentum' again, and the CompUSAs and Borders will take
care
> >of
> >> > the rest.
> >> >
> >> > Bruce 'former hardware/software sales guy' Armstrong
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 23:11:18 -0800,
> >> >  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> >> > Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote:
> >> > >IMHO PowerBuilder is never going to happen the way it should if you
can
> >> not
> >> > >buy it at a regular software outlet like CompUSA.   How you do that,
I
> >> don't
> >> > >know, but others do.  If Delphi can, why not us?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> >> > http://www.teamsybase.com
> >> > http://www.needhim.org
> >> >
> >> > ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> >> > http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I think I searched the whole thread and I can't find any specifics on these
"usability problems".  I agree (and I'm sure everyone else does too) that
the IDE was unstable in certain versions.  There are also a number of known
GPF situations and bugs but PB doesn't really stand-out from other IDE's due
to them in my opinion (6.5.1 - very good, 7.0.3 - pretty good, 8.0.1 pretty
good).

Please provide specifics so we can at least discuss them as a group and
Sybase can add those to the list of issues they in turn can at least
consider.

-EGM

Bill Norton <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:7yIFel6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] wrote:
>
> >I don't know why you read what you read between the lines -- having known
> >Sue and the PB development team for a while, the effort to rebuild the
> >infrastructure are meant to support future product enhancements that
people
> >are requesting today(!) but are simply not possible using the current
> >implementation of either the PBVM, the datawindow engine, etc.
>
> Well, it's possible that my interpretation of the word "infrastructure"
was
> incorrect. Maybe it was just wishful thinking on my part that someone at
PB had
> even noticed that there are usability problems.
>
> So, Sue, let me ask you directly, is the usability of PB even a concern at
all
> to you?
>
>
> Bill Norton
> Austin, TX

Edward Muesch wrote: 
>I think I searched the whole thread and I can't find any specifics on these
>"usability problems".  

Please take a look at the thread called "The Usability Issue..."

>I agree (and I'm sure everyone else does too) that
>the IDE was unstable in certain versions.  

I'm not talking about bugs , GPF's, etc. That's been covered. I'm talking about
human factors, the interface, and usability issues. If you are unfamiliar with
these issues in general you might take a look at the "Interface Hall of Shame"
web site,  http://www.iarchitect.com/mfame.htm . Another good site is
http://www.asktog.com/ .



Bill Norton
Austin, TX

Bill,

While I tend to support both views of any discussion, being that there are
different sides to any argument, I'm afraid your rantings are beginning to
lose luster. You've already stated that you're working with PB6.5. Would you
agree that it would be unfair of you to comment on usability of a product 2
generations further down the road? This would just be a guess, but I don't
think PB6.5 is going to be enhanced anymore, not even for usability.

regards,
Bill Green





"Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:7yIFel6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
> Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] wrote:
>
> >I don't know why you read what you read between the lines -- having known
> >Sue and the PB development team for a while, the effort to rebuild the
> >infrastructure are meant to support future product enhancements that
people
> >are requesting today(!) but are simply not possible using the current
> >implementation of either the PBVM, the datawindow engine, etc.
>
> Well, it's possible that my interpretation of the word "infrastructure"
was
> incorrect. Maybe it was just wishful thinking on my part that someone at
PB had
> even noticed that there are usability problems.
>
> So, Sue, let me ask you directly, is the usability of PB even a concern at
all
> to you?
>
>
> Bill Norton
> Austin, TX

I saw the thread when I responded to you earlier today.

With all due respect, if you have issues then you could at least state them.
I understand your frustration with the Library Painter but - and again I
don't mean to diminish your right to a position - you haven't really
provided any details on your position and I really don't want to go to a
website to get someone else's whom you happen to agree with.

Maybe we should just leave it at that.

-EGM


Bill Norton <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Vuojta7yBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
>
> Edward Muesch wrote:
> >I think I searched the whole thread and I can't find any specifics on
these
> >"usability problems".
>
> Please take a look at the thread called "The Usability Issue..."
>
> >I agree (and I'm sure everyone else does too) that
> >the IDE was unstable in certain versions.
>
> I'm not talking about bugs , GPF's, etc. That's been covered. I'm talking
about
> human factors, the interface, and usability issues. If you are unfamiliar
with
> these issues in general you might take a look at the "Interface Hall of
Shame"
> web site,  http://www.iarchitect.com/mfame.htm . Another good site is
> http://www.asktog.com/ .
>
>
>
> Bill Norton
> Austin, TX

My apologies. I let my irritation get ahead of my brain for a second. Every
opinion counts.


regards,
Bill Green


"Bill Green[TeamSybase]" <bill.green@teamsybase.com> wrote in message
news:KK7Wrl8yBHA.244@forums.sybase.com...
> Bill,
>
> While I tend to support both views of any discussion, being that there are
> different sides to any argument, I'm afraid your rantings are beginning to
> lose luster. You've already stated that you're working with PB6.5. Would
you
> agree that it would be unfair of you to comment on usability of a product
2
> generations further down the road? This would just be a guess, but I don't
> think PB6.5 is going to be enhanced anymore, not even for usability.
>
> regards,
> Bill Green
>
>
>
>
>
> "Bill Norton" <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:7yIFel6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
> > Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] wrote:
> >
> > >I don't know why you read what you read between the lines -- having
known
> > >Sue and the PB development team for a while, the effort to rebuild the
> > >infrastructure are meant to support future product enhancements that
> people
> > >are requesting today(!) but are simply not possible using the current
> > >implementation of either the PBVM, the datawindow engine, etc.
> >
> > Well, it's possible that my interpretation of the word "infrastructure"
> was
> > incorrect. Maybe it was just wishful thinking on my part that someone at
> PB had
> > even noticed that there are usability problems.
> >
> > So, Sue, let me ask you directly, is the usability of PB even a concern
at
> all
> > to you?
> >
> >
> > Bill Norton
> > Austin, TX
>
>

Bill,

Can I suggest you download the PB8 evaluation version:

     http://www.sybase.com/pb8_eval

and take a look at it before we get too deep into usability issues.

IMHO, PB8 took great strides in that area.

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 17:41:23 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Bill Norton <bnorton@austin.rr.com> wrote: 
>Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase] wrote: 
>
>>I don't know why you read what you read between the lines -- having known
>>Sue and the PB development team for a while, the effort to rebuild the
>>infrastructure are meant to support future product enhancements that people
>>are requesting today(!) but are simply not possible using the current
>>implementation of either the PBVM, the datawindow engine, etc.
>
>Well, it's possible that my interpretation of the word "infrastructure" was
>incorrect. Maybe it was just wishful thinking on my part that someone at PB had
>even noticed that there are usability problems.
>
>So, Sue, let me ask you directly, is the usability of PB even a concern at all
>to you?
>
>
>Bill Norton
>Austin, TX

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

As memory serves, Oracle 'saved' that million dollars by trimming staff.  I'm
sure Sybase could also claim the same....

On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:57:16 -0500,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Jerry Siegel <jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote: 
>The solution to the usability problem may be to "eat your own dog food". By
>which I mean use PB for Sybase's own internal business applications.
>Besides, maybe you would get to match Oracle's claim of saving a million
>dollars by using their own applications.
>
>Bill Norton wrote in message <8gfCo44yBHA.133@forums.sybase.com>...
>>Sue Dunnell wrote:
>>>We will be rebuilding some of our core functionality. PB is over 10 years
>old,
>>>and some of its infrastructure needs to be modified/rebuilt. This is true
>for
>>>any software product; PB was originally developed to address a different
>>>programming environment before the many languages and standards we have
>today
>>>existed. This is work we are currently doing, and it's a work in progress,
>but
>>>it's not something that can sell new versions of PB - it's not a sexy new
>>>feature to write about like XML is.
>>
>>Well, this pretty much confirms the suspicion I have always had that the PB
>>developers are much, much more interested in chasing any hot new technology
>in a
>>short skirt than taking care of business on the home front.
>>
>>In my opinion, it is exactly this attitude that has caused PowerBuilder to
>slip
>>into the status of a second-tier, also-ran development tool in the minds of
>most
>>people, and it is exactly this attitude that will keep it there until it is
>>endeared only by a handful of propeller-heads  running a Linux version of
>PB on
>>a box they built from scratch.
>>
>>I strongly disagree with your claim that cleaning up the "infrastructure"
>will
>>not sell any more copies of PB. This is, in fact, the primary reason I had
>to
>>stop recommending PB to my clients, so these are lost sales that can be
>directly
>>attributed to PB's usability problems.
>>
>>
>>Bill Norton
>>Austin, TX
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

I agree 100%. I just hope they don't break too many things in the process.
Our migration from 6.5 to 8 was littered with issues where they "broke"
functionality that used to work. Especially in the datawindow.

We even got a response back from engineering that basically said "the
datawindow was never intended to work that way so we're not going to fix
it." They did finally back down, but it was REALLY irritating to get such a
response.

Mike Kruchten


"Jerry Siegel" <jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:asRhAl6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
> If cleaning up the infrastructure means a product that is more stable, has
> fewer bugs, and is easier to fit with new features, that surely is a
selling
> point. Or have you not read the reviews of the gamma [that's the next
Greek
> letter after beta] version of VS.NET?
> As for XML, before too long it's going to be mandatory for any application
> that wants to talk to another, as much an expected part of the scenery as
IP
> and SQL. Do it, and do it right.
>

What were you doing that broke?  I've migrated dozens of apps from 6.x to 8.x
without issues.

On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:27:12 -0600,
 in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
Mike Kruchten <mkruchten@fsisolutions.com> wrote: 
>I agree 100%. I just hope they don't break too many things in the process.
>Our migration from 6.5 to 8 was littered with issues where they "broke"
>functionality that used to work. Especially in the datawindow.
>
>We even got a response back from engineering that basically said "the
>datawindow was never intended to work that way so we're not going to fix
>it." They did finally back down, but it was REALLY irritating to get such a
>response.
>
>Mike Kruchten
>
>
>"Jerry Siegel" <jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
>news:asRhAl6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
>> If cleaning up the infrastructure means a product that is more stable, has
>> fewer bugs, and is easier to fit with new features, that surely is a
>selling
>> point. Or have you not read the reviews of the gamma [that's the next
>Greek
>> letter after beta] version of VS.NET?
>> As for XML, before too long it's going to be mandatory for any application
>> that wants to talk to another, as much an expected part of the scenery as
>IP
>> and SQL. Do it, and do it right.
>>
>
>
>

Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
http://www.teamsybase.com
http://www.needhim.org

---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Of course things will get broken. And fixed. And maybe even documented, like
the necessary changes to event order in tree and list views that happened in
8 due to a shift to the Windows native controls. And maybe the *VERY*
necessary regression testing will improve the test suite as well.

Mike Kruchten wrote in message ...
>I agree 100%. I just hope they don't break too many things in the process.
>Our migration from 6.5 to 8 was littered with issues where they "broke"
>functionality that used to work. Especially in the datawindow.
>
>We even got a response back from engineering that basically said "the
>datawindow was never intended to work that way so we're not going to fix
>it." They did finally back down, but it was REALLY irritating to get such a
>response.
>
>Mike Kruchten
>
>
>"Jerry Siegel" <jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
>news:asRhAl6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
>> If cleaning up the infrastructure means a product that is more stable,
has
>> fewer bugs, and is easier to fit with new features, that surely is a
>selling
>> point. Or have you not read the reviews of the gamma [that's the next
>Greek
>> letter after beta] version of VS.NET?
>> As for XML, before too long it's going to be mandatory for any
application
>> that wants to talk to another, as much an expected part of the scenery as
>IP
>> and SQL. Do it, and do it right.
>>
>
>
>

"Mike Kruchten" <mkruchten@fsisolutions.com> wrote in message
news:j6arF$EzBHA.206@forums.sybase.com...
> We even got a response back from engineering that basically said "the
> datawindow was never intended to work that way so we're not going to fix
> it." They did finally back down, but it was REALLY irritating to get such
a
> response.

  Heh. There was a bug in 4 that would cause a repaint if you switched menus
in an MDI app. Normally, it would be too fast to notice, but we were
displaying a fairly large autocad drawing that took several seconds to
render. PowerSoft's response was "Yes, it's a bug, but the menu code's
complex and we don't want to touch it. It's not in PB5, so upgrade to that
when we release it."

--
Mike Swaim
Michael.Swaim@UBSWenergy.com
Disclaimer: Yeah, like I speak for <employer>.

"BEDick" <bdick@cox.net> wrote in message
news:exy2iFtyBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
>
> roy kiesler                3969
> terry voth                 3604
> simon caldwell             2982
> bruce armstrong            2945
> terry dykstra              2143
> eric aling                 2111
> philip salgannik           1653

I never wanted to join - too many restrictions on online behaviour :-))


pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
Philip Salgannik


> bill green                 1313
> jim o'neil                 1113
> bug                         994

"E Chapa" <evita.chapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
news:XxZzZ#qyBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> Tell it Victor!  I went looking around Sybase's eshop area and about had a
> cow when I saw the price difference between desktop and professional.  I
> agree - why can't desktop connect to oracle?   Sure we all don't have
> bizillions of $ to have Oracle enterprise.  I saw this somehere but can
you
> connect to oracle personal in PB (any version) now?

Sure you can - ODBC is always there for you.

pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
Philip Salgannik

There were numerous little "gotchas", but in this particular case it was the
auto vertical scrolling in a datawindow when tabbing to a field that wasn't
visible.

First they fixed the issue, but the fixed caused a display problem when
reverse tabbing so we told them it wasn't fixed. That's when we got the "it
was never meant to do that so we're not fixing it" response, which we
(politely) rejected by pointing out that it worked in 7 and 6.5, and to the
best of my recall further back than that.

I've just been notified that it's "fixed" again and should be in build 9100.

Mike

"Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]" <NOCANSPAM_bruce.armstrong@teamsybase.com>
wrote in message news:kIEu8$EzBHA.333@forums.sybase.com...
> What were you doing that broke?  I've migrated dozens of apps from 6.x to
8.x
> without issues.
>
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:27:12 -0600,
>  in powersoft.public.powerbuilder.futures_discussion
> Mike Kruchten <mkruchten@fsisolutions.com> wrote:
> >I agree 100%. I just hope they don't break too many things in the
process.
> >Our migration from 6.5 to 8 was littered with issues where they "broke"
> >functionality that used to work. Especially in the datawindow.
> >
> >We even got a response back from engineering that basically said "the
> >datawindow was never intended to work that way so we're not going to fix
> >it." They did finally back down, but it was REALLY irritating to get such
a
> >response.
> >
> >Mike Kruchten
> >
> >
> >"Jerry Siegel" <jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
> >news:asRhAl6yBHA.292@forums.sybase.com...
> >> If cleaning up the infrastructure means a product that is more stable,
has
> >> fewer bugs, and is easier to fit with new features, that surely is a
> >selling
> >> point. Or have you not read the reviews of the gamma [that's the next
> >Greek
> >> letter after beta] version of VS.NET?
> >> As for XML, before too long it's going to be mandatory for any
application
> >> that wants to talk to another, as much an expected part of the scenery
as
> >IP
> >> and SQL. Do it, and do it right.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> Bruce Armstrong [TeamSybase]
> http://www.teamsybase.com
> http://www.needhim.org
>
> ---== Posted via the PFCGuide Web Newsreader ==---
> http://www.pfcguide.com/_newsgroups/group_list.asp

Thanks for the info

Evita
"Philip Salgannik" <philemax@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:eaMlXDfzBHA.206@forums.sybase.com...
>
>
>
>
> "E Chapa" <evita.chapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
> news:XxZzZ#qyBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> > Tell it Victor!  I went looking around Sybase's eshop area and about had
a
> > cow when I saw the price difference between desktop and professional.  I
> > agree - why can't desktop connect to oracle?   Sure we all don't have
> > bizillions of $ to have Oracle enterprise.  I saw this somehere but can
> you
> > connect to oracle personal in PB (any version) now?
>
> Sure you can - ODBC is always there for you.
>
> pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
> Philip Salgannik
>
>

Actually PB Desktop is restricted to use only the ODBC drivers that
come with the product.

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 15:10:44 -0500, "Philip Salgannik"
<philemax@attbi.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>
>"E Chapa" <evita.chapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
>news:XxZzZ#qyBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
>> Tell it Victor!  I went looking around Sybase's eshop area and about had a
>> cow when I saw the price difference between desktop and professional.  I
>> agree - why can't desktop connect to oracle?   Sure we all don't have
>> bizillions of $ to have Oracle enterprise.  I saw this somehere but can
>you
>> connect to oracle personal in PB (any version) now?
>
>Sure you can - ODBC is always there for you.
>
>pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
>Philip Salgannik
>
>

Isn't that what I said?

--
This is a FAQ, read Help, then search www.groups.google.com

pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
Philip Salgannik

"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c965c1d.2868314@199.93.177.77...
> Actually PB Desktop is restricted to use only the ODBC drivers that
> come with the product.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 15:10:44 -0500, "Philip Salgannik"
> <philemax@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >"E Chapa" <evita.chapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
> >news:XxZzZ#qyBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> >> Tell it Victor!  I went looking around Sybase's eshop area and about
had a
> >> cow when I saw the price difference between desktop and professional.
I
> >> agree - why can't desktop connect to oracle?   Sure we all don't have
> >> bizillions of $ to have Oracle enterprise.  I saw this somehere but can
> >you
> >> connect to oracle personal in PB (any version) now?
> >
> >Sure you can - ODBC is always there for you.
> >
> >pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
> >Philip Salgannik
> >
> >
>

I just wanted to clarify (for Evita) that PB Desktop will not connect
to any version of Oracle. 

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:37:43 -0500, "Philip Salgannik"
<philemax@attbi.com> wrote:

>Isn't that what I said?
>
>--
>This is a FAQ, read Help, then search www.groups.google.com
>
>pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
>Philip Salgannik
>
>"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
>news:3c965c1d.2868314@199.93.177.77...
>> Actually PB Desktop is restricted to use only the ODBC drivers that
>> come with the product.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>>
>> On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 15:10:44 -0500, "Philip Salgannik"
>> <philemax@attbi.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >"E Chapa" <evita.chapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
>> >news:XxZzZ#qyBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
>> >> Tell it Victor!  I went looking around Sybase's eshop area and about
>had a
>> >> cow when I saw the price difference between desktop and professional.
>I
>> >> agree - why can't desktop connect to oracle?   Sure we all don't have
>> >> bizillions of $ to have Oracle enterprise.  I saw this somehere but can
>> >you
>> >> connect to oracle personal in PB (any version) now?
>> >
>> >Sure you can - ODBC is always there for you.
>> >
>> >pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
>> >Philip Salgannik
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

That's what I was wondering..

Thanks

Evita
"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c97540e.6190741@199.93.177.77...
> I just wanted to clarify (for Evita) that PB Desktop will not connect
> to any version of Oracle.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:37:43 -0500, "Philip Salgannik"
> <philemax@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> >Isn't that what I said?
> >
> >--
> >This is a FAQ, read Help, then search www.groups.google.com
> >
> >pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
> >Philip Salgannik
> >
> >"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
> >news:3c965c1d.2868314@199.93.177.77...
> >> Actually PB Desktop is restricted to use only the ODBC drivers that
> >> come with the product.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >>
> >> On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 15:10:44 -0500, "Philip Salgannik"
> >> <philemax@attbi.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"E Chapa" <evita.chapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:XxZzZ#qyBHA.133@forums.sybase.com...
> >> >> Tell it Victor!  I went looking around Sybase's eshop area and about
> >had a
> >> >> cow when I saw the price difference between desktop and
professional.
> >I
> >> >> agree - why can't desktop connect to oracle?   Sure we all don't
have
> >> >> bizillions of $ to have Oracle enterprise.  I saw this somehere but
can
> >> >you
> >> >> connect to oracle personal in PB (any version) now?
> >> >
> >> >Sure you can - ODBC is always there for you.
> >> >
> >> >pbm_thisusuallydoesnothelp:-))
> >> >Philip Salgannik
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

It WILL connect to Personal Oracle using ODBC. 

You guys are really on to something!  I hope Sybase marketing is
listening...


"Jerry Siegel" <jerrys@data-sci.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:I#TclWhyBHA.318@forums.sybase.com...
> Don't limit the Web DataWindow, limit the server that realizes it to a
> one-connection developer's edition.
> Give them out like AOL disks!
>
> Edward Muesch wrote in message ...
> >I believe you mean to suggest that that was your .02 dollars worth <g>
> >
> >Free PB Desktop with limited Web Datawindow.  Place limitations that
> >wouldn't stop the little guy but only prevent the Corporate client from
> >being able to use it.
> >
> >Do this correctly and advertise the s--t out of it and revenue loss might
> >not even come to be, but watch the market share soar... slowly at first
but
> >there is a history here, it's not a new product.  So the marketing model
is
> >different and the market-share wouldn't just dry up once a price is
placed
> >back on it.  The buzz would be enormous with Sybase lining the revenue
> >streams (through advertising) of those who could help with the "oh gee,
> >what's this?" crowd.
> >
> >The real-world isn't pretty but it works!
> >
> >-EGM
> >
> >Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> >news:bn8kS3gyBHA.304@forums.sybase.com...
> >> >I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups
> >>
> >> Yes, that's what I meant.  Not newsgroups.
> >>
> >> I understand what you're saying.  We're all in this for something and
> it's
> >> not all out of the "goodness of our hearts".   But since what we're
> >talking
> >> about here are perceptions, to me Sybase seems to be all about
Corporate
> >> Corporate Corporate and Big Corporate at that.  If this had made this
> >> product successful I would say continue it, but as yet, it hasn't.
> >> Microsoft is obviously aware of corporations too but they think
different
> >> where marketing is concerned.  All that said, I think Sybase has a lot
> >going
> >> for them.  I'm "fer-em" not "agin-em".  They're very classy in their
own
> >> way, but very un-people oriented in their marketing.  Very corporate
> >> oriented instead.
> >>
> >> Just my .02 cents worth.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Edward Muesch" <emuesch@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:XVfHqbgyBHA.322@forums.sybase.com...
> >> > I believe you mean to suggest getting them out of the "user groups".
> As
> >> far
> >> > as that goes I think they are as much a player in this as anyone is.
> >Even
> >> > more so in that their involvement in marketing their wares gets the
> >> > attention of the corporate customer as well as the "vendor" (in this
> >case,
> >> > Sybase).  The user group, however, might be a little more aggressive
in
> >> > providing the "common man" with resources via a web-site and
> newsletter.
> >> > The "content" of what a user group provides to it's members can be
> >> augmented
> >> > in many ways in addition to the "pizza-and-soda" meetings which I
agree
> >> are
> >> > almost pure marketing presentation.  But I think those presentations
> are
> >> > integral to the synergy of Vendor (Sybase) - Third-party marketer -
> >User.
> >> > Their advertising dollars also translate into sales and generate the
PB
> >> > footprint on the pages of the material the decision makers (our
bosses)
> >> read
> >> > day-to-day.  Their demise (or discontinuation of support for PB) has
> >been
> >> > instrumental in continuing the decreasing market share PB has in the
> >> > corporate world.
> >> >
> >> > My 2 cents.
> >> >
> >> > -EGM
> >> >
> >> > Woody <woody@splawns.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:DzlZ8RfyBHA.204@forums.sybase.com...
> >> > > One of the things you could do to help PB's future is to get the
very
> >> big
> >> > > corporations out of the newsgroups..
> >> > >
> >> > > I can't speak for everyone, and I am not telling how it is, only
how
> >it
> >> > > seems in this part of the country.  Our user group (now dead)
seemed
> >to
> >> be
> >> > > like one big adverstiment for big companies in and out of town.  We
> >did
> >> > very
> >> > > little by way of how the common man, an ordinary programmer, might
do
> >> > > things.
> >> > >
> >> > > Hope I haven't been unfair to anyone, but this is how it seemed to
> me.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

IMHO, .net based PowerBuilder will be the only way
for Sybase to get going again. Too many jumped off
for Java, marketing for PB was just too weak, (esp.
here in Europe, nobody knows PB - well, a few do :),
But if Sybase can do the trick to integrate the
Datawindow as a 'managed class' and create MSIL
instead of pcode (to mention the most important
tasks), and then, with the help of good marketing
(lots of threads about this going on here) making
it well known - PB will be alive.

my 2 cents (EURO of course)

--
Roland Muhlberger -- ROMU Software
easy PB pasting -- SmartPaste at http://www.romu.com/smartpaste

"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>
> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>
> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>
> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>
> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> hear others.)
>
> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>
> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> to start that change now.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

You reminded me of something else... machine code.  In diverse development
environments with non-PB people (and especially ex-PB people) involved in
group discussions, the biggest vulnerability in discussing PB as a viable
future technology is the "interpreted" nature of pcode.  A year or two ago
this wasn't that bad as Java has the same profile.  A Virtual Machine was
acceptable with the argument that this is what allows multi-platform
development.  But with the discontinuation of other platforms for PB and
Java now seen as "too slow" for the client-side and machine-code for PB as
yet another "instability" point for PB (in that using the option is frowned
upon even by the very company that provides the "so-called" capability) this
needs to be fixed.  The horse is already out of the barn on this and
removing the capability would just be seen as "downsizing" the product by a
company that may possibly getting ready to discontinue supporting the
technology.

-EGM


Roland M�hlberger <office@romu.com> wrote in message
news:t8L9a7R0BHA.272@forums.sybase.com...
> IMHO, .net based PowerBuilder will be the only way
> for Sybase to get going again. Too many jumped off
> for Java, marketing for PB was just too weak, (esp.
> here in Europe, nobody knows PB - well, a few do :),
> But if Sybase can do the trick to integrate the
> Datawindow as a 'managed class' and create MSIL
> instead of pcode (to mention the most important
> tasks), and then, with the help of good marketing
> (lots of threads about this going on here) making
> it well known - PB will be alive.
>
> my 2 cents (EURO of course)
>
> --
> Roland Muhlberger -- ROMU Software
> easy PB pasting -- SmartPaste at http://www.romu.com/smartpaste
>
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
> >
> > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
> >
> > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
> >
> > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
> >
> > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> > hear others.)
> >
> > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
> >
> > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> > to start that change now.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
> >
>
>

It will be interesting to see how much the .NET common runtime environment
becomes like a virtual machine.

Edward Muesch wrote in message ...
>You reminded me of something else... machine code.  In diverse development
>environments with non-PB people (and especially ex-PB people) involved in
>group discussions, the biggest vulnerability in discussing PB as a viable
>future technology is the "interpreted" nature of pcode.  A year or two ago
>this wasn't that bad as Java has the same profile.  A Virtual Machine was
>acceptable with the argument that this is what allows multi-platform
>development.  But with the discontinuation of other platforms for PB and
>Java now seen as "too slow" for the client-side and machine-code for PB as
>yet another "instability" point for PB (in that using the option is frowned
>upon even by the very company that provides the "so-called" capability)
this
>needs to be fixed.  The horse is already out of the barn on this and
>removing the capability would just be seen as "downsizing" the product by a
>company that may possibly getting ready to discontinue supporting the
>technology.
>
>-EGM
>
>
>Roland M�hlberger <office@romu.com> wrote in message
>news:t8L9a7R0BHA.272@forums.sybase.com...
>> IMHO, .net based PowerBuilder will be the only way
>> for Sybase to get going again. Too many jumped off
>> for Java, marketing for PB was just too weak, (esp.
>> here in Europe, nobody knows PB - well, a few do :),
>> But if Sybase can do the trick to integrate the
>> Datawindow as a 'managed class' and create MSIL
>> instead of pcode (to mention the most important
>> tasks), and then, with the help of good marketing
>> (lots of threads about this going on here) making
>> it well known - PB will be alive.
>>
>> my 2 cents (EURO of course)
>>
>> --
>> Roland Muhlberger -- ROMU Software
>> easy PB pasting -- SmartPaste at http://www.romu.com/smartpaste
>>
>> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
>> > That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>> >
>> > I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
>> > provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>> >
>> > As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
>> > feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
>> > requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
>> > be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
>> > this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>> >
>> > What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
>> > abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
>> > post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
>> > developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>> >
>> > Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
>> > layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
>> > client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
>> > features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
>> > PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
>> > not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
>> > hear others.)
>> >
>> > What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
>> > thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>> >
>> > I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
>> > understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
>> > time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
>> > strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
>> > influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
>> > to start that change now.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Hi Dave,
Iam glad sybase has taken note of PB's importance in the client server 
market. 
No doubt that PB is still thriving because of strong developer community 
embracing it. But from sybase part there is a lot more to do. these are my 
humble sugggestions:

1. need to have a better marketing strategy of promoting powerbuilder.
1a. the web site now is very confusing . there are lot of products. and lot 
of repackaging the studio which makes very confusing. it should be simple 
for layman as well as decision makers.
one exmaple now i faced with decision to purchase powerbuilde studio and 
easerver studio. there are some common stuiff liek Jaguar which is in both. 
(or rather that is the impression i got)

2. i know PB 8 is going towards the web. being a hardcore pb devloper right 
from version 3.0, there is no guide for powerbuilder to the web using 
easerver. nor easerver tells us about any how to method.

3. bring out lot of books on pb 8 ,pb to web , using easerver etc. MS is 
very developer friendly in that they come out with lot of books even in the 
beta stage. this is how they have a grip on the market share.

imagine .NEt which was a concept just 2 years back. now there are more 
50,000 strong developer network who are working on .net stuff.!!!!. i have 
actually seen my collegues implement a application using .net strategy.

why can't powerbuilder do that?. since PB has been more than 10 years old. 
there are lot of pb shops wanting to move to web and do not want to lose 
their existing investment on PB. even if you could tap to this loyal pb 
shops, Pb would have made money at the end of the day.!!!

support for these products should be improved. the sybase customer service 
which was great some 6 years back has terribly gone down.
- marunach@hotmail.com

Thank you for taking the time to outline your concerns. You have made
some very good points and I would like to address some of them to let
you know what Sybase is doing and plans to do.

>1. need to have a better marketing strategy of promoting powerbuilder.

Sybase now has a dedicated resource responsible solely for marketing
PowerBuilder. A lot of progress has been made in this area but a lot
more work still needs to be done.

>1a. the web site now is very confusing . there are lot of products. and lot 
>of repackaging the studio which makes very confusing. it should be simple 
>for layman as well as decision makers.
>one exmaple now i faced with decision to purchase powerbuilde studio and 
>easerver studio. there are some common stuiff liek Jaguar which is in both. 
>(or rather that is the impression i got)

We recognize that the web site is confusing and incomplete
particularly in the area of PowerBuilder. We are currently in the
process of redeveloping an area of the web site devoted exclusively to
PowerBuilder. I welcome peoples' input into how they would like to see
the site organized. 

>2. i know PB 8 is going towards the web. being a hardcore pb devloper right 
>from version 3.0, there is no guide for powerbuilder to the web using 
>easerver. nor easerver tells us about any how to method.

That is another effort we are working on. Currently there are a number
of documents that cover this area, but they don't cover every area and
sometimes appear to have conflicting approaches.

>3. bring out lot of books on pb 8 ,pb to web , using easerver etc. MS is 
>very developer friendly in that they come out with lot of books even in the 
>beta stage. this is how they have a grip on the market share.
>
>imagine .NEt which was a concept just 2 years back. now there are more 
>50,000 strong developer network who are working on .net stuff.!!!!. i have 
>actually seen my collegues implement a application using .net strategy.
>
>why can't powerbuilder do that?. since PB has been more than 10 years old. 
>there are lot of pb shops wanting to move to web and do not want to lose 
>their existing investment on PB. even if you could tap to this loyal pb 
>shops, Pb would have made money at the end of the day.!!!

I don't know that there will be any books for PB 8 at this point,
however TeamSybase is currently developing plans to publish TWO PB 9
books! One on Advanced Client Server Development and the other on
Distributed Application Development. These books should be ready by
the time PB 9 is GA later this year. 

>support for these products should be improved. the sybase customer service 
>which was great some 6 years back has terribly gone down.

Would you elaborate on this? In what ways do you think support has
declined? I'll make sure the support organization hears about your
concerns.

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

> We recognize that the web site is confusing and incomplete
> particularly in the area of PowerBuilder. We are currently in the
> process of redeveloping an area of the web site devoted exclusively to
> PowerBuilder. I welcome peoples' input into how they would like to see
> the site organized. 

How about a genuinely consolidated and cross-referenced documentation set
for Powerbuilder components in EAServer, both on the web and in the
install. The EAServer documentation (for 3.6.1 at least) ignores PB and the
PB documentation (7.0.3) doesn't include or reference things like the
Jaguar Interface Repository. As a result, if you are trying to talk to the
Jaguar container from a PB component to, for instance, start a thread or
find the current user, you waste a lot of time jumping between PB and
Jaguar documentation as you try to find out whether the functionality has
been encapsulated in a PB system object and how to access it otherwise.


David Tillotson
Pickles Auctions
david.tillotson@pickles.com.au

I should prefix my remarks by saying that I am impressed and grateful for
the amount of support I have received through these newsgroups.
I don't know whether there is much point in letting the support organisation
know about the decline in support. The folk in Sybase providing technical
support already know they are a declining resource!
In the Asia/Pacific, Sybase is pulling out apparently. It has been
frustrating in the extreme to watch the decline in Sybase in Asia/Pacific in
the last five years or so. Especially as I am a fan of its products.
They have substantially reduced their technical staff on the ground and do
not have any focus on "expert sales" of PB or ASE. There appears to be some
focus on ASA/ianywhere but this is marketing related only.
They shifted their help desk from Australia to Singapore a few years ago.
This meant that as a DBA wanting support in an English speaking country, you
only had access to people who spoke English as a second language and meant
frustrating confusion when support staff could not understand accents or
colloquialisms. I believe that for Australian customers some help desk
functions have been returned, but it indicated that Sybase did not like its
customers.

Brett Weaver

> >support for these products should be improved. the sybase customer
service
> >which was great some 6 years back has terribly gone down.
>
> Would you elaborate on this? In what ways do you think support has
> declined? I'll make sure the support organization hears about your
> concerns.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

I'd like to see both things happen.
It would be great to see myself be able to deploy a component written in PB
to Weblogic/Websphere/EAServer...all the J2EE App Servers. But it sort of
half way does that anyways.

It would be over the top if Sybase could somehow interface PB with .Net. To
be able to code against the CLR and do all the things that VB.Net does.
Better yet, to be able to create apps against the CLR and use the
Datawindows within that farmework.

I think .Net is the current buzz..since it's the new kid on the block. It
would be exciting to see myself as a PB developer not feel left out from the
rest of the world.




"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c8e238d.7608760@199.93.177.77...
> That subject line should get your attention. <g>
>
> I'm very pleased with the participation in this group. We've obviously
> provided a well for a very thirsty group of developers!
>
> As you may or may not know, PB 9 is about to go into Beta and the
> feature set has pretty much been frozen. I know a lot of these
> requests are for very useful features and hopefully many will some day
> be incorporated into PB. I don't know what can be done for PB 9 at
> this point. Just don't want to falsely get people's hopes up.
>
> What I would like to do, is raise the discussion to a higher level of
> abstraction. Instead of specifics (please feel free to continue to
> post those too) I would like to get a feel for where you, as a PB
> developer would like to see PowerBuilder go in the future.
>
> Do you want it to generate Java? Do you want it to compile to the MSIL
> layer for .NET? Do you think it should focus more on features for
> client server applications? Do you think it should incorporate more
> features to make web development easier? Is it important to you that
> PowerBuilder can generate web services (or consume them) or does that
> not interest you in the least? (These are just some ideas, I'd like to
> hear others.)
>
> What do you think Sybase needs to do with PowerBuilder to make it
> thrive and regain some of the glory it had a few years ago?
>
> I've read some of your messages about it being too late and I
> understand the bitterness you may feel. Unfortunately I don't have a
> time machine so I can't go back a few years and change Sybase's past
> strategy with regard to PowerBuilder. We do have an opportunity now to
> influence the direction that PB goes in and I'm asking for your ideas
> to start that change now.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>

Hi all,

I was wondering if Sybase could come with a documentation as Microsoft has done for all it's products in MSDN.
That was we can have product based documentation with syntax helps, examples and usage description for every function and object in
PB and other Sybase products.

Thanks,
Biju
"Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message news:3c9e15cf.92512375@199.93.177.77...
Thank you for taking the time to outline your concerns. You have made
some very good points and I would like to address some of them to let
you know what Sybase is doing and plans to do.

>1. need to have a better marketing strategy of promoting powerbuilder.

Sybase now has a dedicated resource responsible solely for marketing
PowerBuilder. A lot of progress has been made in this area but a lot
more work still needs to be done.

>1a. the web site now is very confusing . there are lot of products. and lot
>of repackaging the studio which makes very confusing. it should be simple
>for layman as well as decision makers.
>one exmaple now i faced with decision to purchase powerbuilde studio and
>easerver studio. there are some common stuiff liek Jaguar which is in both.
>(or rather that is the impression i got)

We recognize that the web site is confusing and incomplete
particularly in the area of PowerBuilder. We are currently in the
process of redeveloping an area of the web site devoted exclusively to
PowerBuilder. I welcome peoples' input into how they would like to see
the site organized.

>2. i know PB 8 is going towards the web. being a hardcore pb devloper right
>from version 3.0, there is no guide for powerbuilder to the web using
>easerver. nor easerver tells us about any how to method.

That is another effort we are working on. Currently there are a number
of documents that cover this area, but they don't cover every area and
sometimes appear to have conflicting approaches.

>3. bring out lot of books on pb 8 ,pb to web , using easerver etc. MS is
>very developer friendly in that they come out with lot of books even in the
>beta stage. this is how they have a grip on the market share.
>
>imagine .NEt which was a concept just 2 years back. now there are more
>50,000 strong developer network who are working on .net stuff.!!!!. i have
>actually seen my collegues implement a application using .net strategy.
>
>why can't powerbuilder do that?. since PB has been more than 10 years old.
>there are lot of pb shops wanting to move to web and do not want to lose
>their existing investment on PB. even if you could tap to this loyal pb
>shops, Pb would have made money at the end of the day.!!!

I don't know that there will be any books for PB 8 at this point,
however TeamSybase is currently developing plans to publish TWO PB 9
books! One on Advanced Client Server Development and the other on
Distributed Application Development. These books should be ready by
the time PB 9 is GA later this year.

>support for these products should be improved. the sybase customer service
>which was great some 6 years back has terribly gone down.

Would you elaborate on this? In what ways do you think support has
declined? I'll make sure the support organization hears about your
concerns.

Regards,
Dave Fish [TeamSybase]

http://sybooks.sybase.com
http://sdn.sybase.com

--
<hopethishelps/>
Roy Kiesler [TeamSybase]
Sybase Developer Network -- http://sdn.sybase.com

"Biju Nair" <bijurk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:F5zJ5WcaCHA.313@forums.sybase.com...
> Hi all,
>
> I was wondering if Sybase could come with a documentation as Microsoft has
done for all it's products in MSDN.
> That was we can have product based documentation with syntax helps,
examples and usage description for every function and object in
> PB and other Sybase products.
>
> Thanks,
> Biju
> "Dave Fish [Team Sybase]" <dfish@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3c9e15cf.92512375@199.93.177.77...
> Thank you for taking the time to outline your concerns. You have made
> some very good points and I would like to address some of them to let
> you know what Sybase is doing and plans to do.
>
> >1. need to have a better marketing strategy of promoting powerbuilder.
>
> Sybase now has a dedicated resource responsible solely for marketing
> PowerBuilder. A lot of progress has been made in this area but a lot
> more work still needs to be done.
>
> >1a. the web site now is very confusing . there are lot of products. and
lot
> >of repackaging the studio which makes very confusing. it should be simple
> >for layman as well as decision makers.
> >one exmaple now i faced with decision to purchase powerbuilde studio and
> >easerver studio. there are some common stuiff liek Jaguar which is in
both.
> >(or rather that is the impression i got)
>
> We recognize that the web site is confusing and incomplete
> particularly in the area of PowerBuilder. We are currently in the
> process of redeveloping an area of the web site devoted exclusively to
> PowerBuilder. I welcome peoples' input into how they would like to see
> the site organized.
>
> >2. i know PB 8 is going towards the web. being a hardcore pb devloper
right
> >from version 3.0, there is no guide for powerbuilder to the web using
> >easerver. nor easerver tells us about any how to method.
>
> That is another effort we are working on. Currently there are a number
> of documents that cover this area, but they don't cover every area and
> sometimes appear to have conflicting approaches.
>
> >3. bring out lot of books on pb 8 ,pb to web , using easerver etc. MS is
> >very developer friendly in that they come out with lot of books even in
the
> >beta stage. this is how they have a grip on the market share.
> >
> >imagine .NEt which was a concept just 2 years back. now there are more
> >50,000 strong developer network who are working on .net stuff.!!!!. i
have
> >actually seen my collegues implement a application using .net strategy.
> >
> >why can't powerbuilder do that?. since PB has been more than 10 years
old.
> >there are lot of pb shops wanting to move to web and do not want to lose
> >their existing investment on PB. even if you could tap to this loyal pb
> >shops, Pb would have made money at the end of the day.!!!
>
> I don't know that there will be any books for PB 8 at this point,
> however TeamSybase is currently developing plans to publish TWO PB 9
> books! One on Advanced Client Server Development and the other on
> Distributed Application Development. These books should be ready by
> the time PB 9 is GA later this year.
>
> >support for these products should be improved. the sybase customer
service
> >which was great some 6 years back has terribly gone down.
>
> Would you elaborate on this? In what ways do you think support has
> declined? I'll make sure the support organization hears about your
> concerns.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Fish [TeamSybase]
>
>

I think PB Online Books is more than enough.

I agree - what I'd rather see though are more examples of powerbuilder
interfacing to other things, like Robohelp


--
Evita R. Chapa
Senior Systems Analyst II
Command Technologies, Inc.

"Vasu" <kr_vasudev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2LgdFDsaCHA.334@forums.sybase.com...
> I think PB Online Books is more than enough.
>
>

    Evita;

    Better yet, I would like to see RoboHelp, ComponetOne, etc included
(bundled) with PB Enterprise!

Regards ... Chris

"E Chapa" <echapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
news:xyW4TVtaCHA.313@forums.sybase.com...
> I agree - what I'd rather see though are more examples of powerbuilder
> interfacing to other things, like Robohelp
>
>
> --
> Evita R. Chapa
> Senior Systems Analyst II
> Command Technologies, Inc.
>
> "Vasu" <kr_vasudev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2LgdFDsaCHA.334@forums.sybase.com...
> > I think PB Online Books is more than enough.
> >
> >
>
>

That would drive up the price of PB enterprise for everyone, regardless of
whether they use those tools.   How would this be more beneficial than just
buying RoboHelp if you need it and installing it?

Or were you hoping to get it for no additional charge?  That would be a
great business model for you, but not so smart for Sybase.


"Chris Pollach" <cpollach@ajja.com> wrote in message
news:16dHditaCHA.197@forums.sybase.com...
>     Evita;
>
>     Better yet, I would like to see RoboHelp, ComponetOne, etc included
> (bundled) with PB Enterprise!
>
> Regards ... Chris
>
> "E Chapa" <echapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
> news:xyW4TVtaCHA.313@forums.sybase.com...
> > I agree - what I'd rather see though are more examples of powerbuilder
> > interfacing to other things, like Robohelp
> >
> >
> > --
> > Evita R. Chapa
> > Senior Systems Analyst II
> > Command Technologies, Inc.
> >
> > "Vasu" <kr_vasudev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:2LgdFDsaCHA.334@forums.sybase.com...
> > > I think PB Online Books is more than enough.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Dan;

    My suggestion to Sybase the other day was to create a PB Studio (forget
EAStudio) and bundle in what PB developers really need (Installer, Help
Compiler, "C" compiler [remember "C" User objects - they still own Waterloo
Business Systems!], Source Code Manager, etc). I remember Powesoft's motto -
"One stop shopping for your Application Development Needs".
    Ah the good old days. My $0.02 worth!

Regards .. Chris


"Daniel Coppersmith" <daniel@N.0.S.P.A.M_infrontsoftware.com> wrote in
message news:9oWDuRuaCHA.313@forums.sybase.com...
> That would drive up the price of PB enterprise for everyone, regardless of
> whether they use those tools.   How would this be more beneficial than
just
> buying RoboHelp if you need it and installing it?
>
> Or were you hoping to get it for no additional charge?  That would be a
> great business model for you, but not so smart for Sybase.
>
>
> "Chris Pollach" <cpollach@ajja.com> wrote in message
> news:16dHditaCHA.197@forums.sybase.com...
> >     Evita;
> >
> >     Better yet, I would like to see RoboHelp, ComponetOne, etc included
> > (bundled) with PB Enterprise!
> >
> > Regards ... Chris
> >
> > "E Chapa" <echapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
> > news:xyW4TVtaCHA.313@forums.sybase.com...
> > > I agree - what I'd rather see though are more examples of powerbuilder
> > > interfacing to other things, like Robohelp
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Evita R. Chapa
> > > Senior Systems Analyst II
> > > Command Technologies, Inc.
> > >
> > > "Vasu" <kr_vasudev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:2LgdFDsaCHA.334@forums.sybase.com...
> > > > I think PB Online Books is more than enough.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

My comment was regarding seeing these in like their example apps or their
website. I think it makes PB look more attrractive - "hey, look what you can
use with PB"...I wouldn't need Robohelp included with PB unless I needed
it..


--
Evita R. Chapa
Senior Systems Analyst II
Command Technologies, Inc.

"E Chapa" <echapa@commtechinc.com> wrote in message
news:xyW4TVtaCHA.313@forums.sybase.com...
> I agree - what I'd rather see though are more examples of powerbuilder
> interfacing to other things, like Robohelp
>
>
> --
> Evita R. Chapa
> Senior Systems Analyst II
> Command Technologies, Inc.
>
> "Vasu" <kr_vasudev@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2LgdFDsaCHA.334@forums.sybase.com...
> > I think PB Online Books is more than enough.
> >
> >
>
>