Another nail in the coffin for D3

[Kevin Powick]

Rocket Software has had a policy change in that they no longer sell developer copies for D3. Unless you're an OEM partner, you have to pay full retail pricing.

Since I'm not, and will likely not become, a  Rocket partner, my D3 development costs have just skyrocketed!

Below is an excerpt from a recent email I received from Rocket.

We have also had some changes to our developer program under Rocket. We no longer provide the software developer copies which have an expiration date. These are replaced with perpetual OEM licenses for our partners.
Since you are not set up as a partner for Rocket however, I am not able to offer this to you. You are able to purchase a standard production license at SRP pricing that I am providing below for your reference.

Personally, I think developer copies should be free, like OpenQM, but even the modest fee that was being charged by Rocket was acceptable to me.  Now, having to pay full retail, I have even less motivation to keep my clients on D3.  I'll be pushing OpenQM even harder.

--
Kevin Powick

[Charlie Noah]

Hi Kevin,

I've had the same problem getting a developer copy of Universe. It seems Rocket is determined to shoot themselves (and us) in the foot. OpenQM is a great alternative, and if I wasn't so happy with Jbase, I'd give them a shakedown cruise. I still get a developer license for Jbase every year, so I don't have any incentive to change.

Best,
Charlie

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
the "Pick and MultiValue Databases" group.
To post, email to: mvd...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, email to: mvdbms+un...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit http://groups.google.com/group/mvdbms

[Kevin Powick]

Did anyone receive prior warning/notice from Rocket about this policy change?

I feel like I've been backed into a corner.  My D3 system no longer works and I have to pay a hell of a lot more to get it working again.

I'm essentially a hostage and quite pissed-off about it.

--

Kevin Powick

[geneb]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Kevin Powick wrote:

> Rocket Software has had a policy change in that they no longer sell
> developer copies for D3. Unless you're an OEM partner, you have to pay full
> retail pricing.
>

Who do they think they are, Embarcadero? :)

> *We have also had some changes to our developer program under Rocket. We no

>> longer provide the software developer copies which have an expiration date.

>> These are replaced with perpetual OEM licenses for our partners.*
>> *Since you are not set up as a partner for Rocket however, I am not able

>> to offer this to you. You are able to purchase a standard production

>> license at SRP pricing that I am providing below for your reference.*
>
Well yeah, they've got to keep us freeloaders from living too high on
their hog you know. Hookers and blow ain't cheap and those quarterly
bonuses need to be protected!

> Personally, I think developer copies should be free, like OpenQM, but even
> the modest fee that was being charged by Rocket was acceptable to me. Now,
> having to pay full retail, I have even less motivation to keep my clients
> on D3. I'll be pushing OpenQM even harder.
>

Agreed. The only reason I'm on D3 right now is because of that awful
Screen-Gen crap I can never get the time to write out from under me. :(

g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

[geneb]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Kevin Powick wrote:

Well since sacrificing long-term viability in order to increase short-term
profits are all the rage these days, they've got you right where they want
you.

[Charlie Noah]

Gene,

I think it's time for you to tell them to KMA and get out from under that Screen-Gen crap. Get 100% control of what you have. If I can be of any assistance, just let me know. Go OpenQM, Jbase or anything else that you can use to do everything you want to do. There are several open source platforms out there.

Actually, I've used Jbase to support Universe, D3 (ask Kevin) and other environments. I know I'm in the Jbase choir - just sayin...

Charlie

[Charlie Noah]

Gene,

If you don't have my email address, shoot me a message through my store.

Charlie

Tiny Bear Wild Bird Store
Home of "Safety Net Shipping"
http://www.TinyBearWildBirdStore.com
Toll Free: 1-855-TinyBear (855-846-9232)

On 02-17-2016 8:57 PM, Charlie Noah wrote:

Gene,

I think it's time for you to tell them to KMA and get out from under that Screen-Gen crap. Get 100% control of what you have. If I can be of any assistance, just let me know. Go OpenQM, Jbase or anything else that you can use to do everything you want to do. There are several open source platforms out there.

Actually, I've used Jbase to support Universe, D3 (ask Kevin) and other environments. I know I'm in the Jbase choir - just sayin...

Charlie

On 02-17-2016 7:46 PM, geneb wrote:

[CDMI - Steve T]

i personally enjoy working with QM over D3.

i would point to price per seat, features, and the best support in the business.

IMHO

be well all,

 

Steve Trimble

office (501) 615-8674

cell (501) 772-3450

Computerized Data Mgmt Inc (CDMI)

---

From: Kevin Powick <kpo...@gmail.com>
To: Pick and MultiValue Databases <mvd...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 5:32 PM
Subject: [mvdbms] Another nail in the coffin for D3

[geneb]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Charlie Noah wrote:

> Gene,
>
> I think it's time for you to tell them to KMA and get out from under that
> Screen-Gen crap. Get 100% control of what you have. If I can be of any
> assistance, just let me know. Go OpenQM, Jbase or anything else that you can
> use to do everything you want to do. There are several open source platforms
> out there.
>

Unfortunately, it's not going to happen. There's simply no "corporate
will" for it. Trust me, if I was in control of the budget, D3 would've
vanished shortly after I found out about OpenQM. :)

[Richard Wilson]

I find it odd that people are complaining about buying tools to support their
professions

When I was in construction I bought hammers and as a software developer
I buy licenses.

I would ask how many thousands/millions of dollars you might have billed
over 20 - 30 years in the business and what % of that went to buy license.
(Probably less that your internet costs)

Once again I may have shot myself in the foot.

Rich

On 2/18/2016 9:39 AM, geneb wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Charlie Noah wrote:
>
>> Gene,
>>
>> I think it's time for you to tell them to KMA and get out from under that
>> Screen-Gen crap. Get 100% control of what you have. If I can be of any
>> assistance, just let me know. Go OpenQM, Jbase or anything else that you can
>> use to do everything you want to do. There are several open source platforms
>> out there.
>>
> Unfortunately, it's not going to happen. There's simply no "corporate will"
> for it. Trust me, if I was in control of the budget, D3 would've vanished
> shortly after I found out about OpenQM. :)
>
> g.
>

--

Richard A Wilson
Lakeside Systems
Smithfield, RI, USA
Voice 401-231-3959
Fax 206-202-2064

[Kevin Powick]

On Thursday, 18 February 2016 09:48:29 UTC-5, Richard Wilson wrote:

I find it odd that people are complaining about buying tools to support their
professions 

The software world has changed.  Tools are now largely free because platform vendors know that the real money is in end-users buying their platforms, not the relatively small number of developers that need the platform upon which to create content.  The iPhone would not have taken off like it did without the developers creating the apps for it.  Yes, there are nominal fees involved, but nothing like what Rocket has recently done.

With D3, what I used to get for $US 500.00 would now cost me close to $US 10,000.00.  D3 by itself does nothing; you need applications.  And those applications can just as easily be written for QM, jBASE, and other MV platforms. 

Rocket seems to be going backwards in terms of developer relations.  As a platform vendor, shouldn't they be making it easier for developers to create software that promotes their product?  This should be especially true when D3 is competing not only with less expensive MV alternatives, but the entire database industry, of which many products are low cost or free.

--

Kevin Powick

[Charlie Noah]

Well said, Kevin!

[CDMI - Steve T]

That's exactly why I don't own any D3 licenses.

Used to have mvBASE licenses. Those are gone now.

I can program on most mv flavors, but my favorite is openQM

 

Steve Trimble

office (501) 615-8674

cell (501) 772-3450

Computerized Data Mgmt Inc (CDMI)

---

From: Kevin Powick <kpo...@gmail.com>
To: Pick and MultiValue Databases <mvd...@googlegroups.com>

Cc: rwi...@lakeside-systems.com
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: [mvdbms] Another nail in the coffin for D3

[Dawn Wolthuis]

There is a new MultiValue offering on the block that is not open source but is free, not just for developers but for production deployment as well. If interested, catch me offlist.  

--dawn

--

Dawn M. Wolthuis

Take and give some delight today

[Kevin Powick]

On Thursday, 18 February 2016 11:11:09 UTC-5, Dawn Wolthuis wrote:

There is a new MultiValue offering on the block that is not open source but is free, not just for developers but for production deployment as well. If interested, catch me offlist.  

Why the secrecy?  Do those that have created this new MV offering not want to promote it?

--

Kevin Powick

[Glen Batchelor]

+1

[Tony Gravagno]

 Kevin wrote:

With D3, what I used to get for $US 500.00 would now cost me close to $US 10,000.00.

I've enjoyed having 10 D3 Developer licenses, it's useful to me and doesn't cost the provider any more - win/win. And I'm also not pleased with the pricing change. However, as noted in mvTalk the same policy applies to all Rocket databases, not just D3. With the licensing change I scaled down to 2 licenses. (This actually allows 3 connections from a given IP.) Since I really don't use more than that, I'm fine with going from 10 to 3. The retail cost for this is around $1000. For OEMs who used to pay full price (depending on the weather) the cost for a permanent license (no longer yearly) is now tiny. There is something good in there but becoming an OEM for Rocket can be difficult. I'm sure they see this as a good and balanced move but they're missing the big picture.

For those who find the cost of the tooling to be prohibitive, there is an option of announcing that they will no longer support the platform, and why. This leaves end-users to find other service providers. That leads to a common question I get from business owners "where can we find more people to support this platform?" It's not in Rocket's best interest to make that problem worse. They should be facilitating adoption of their platform. The next question I get is "should I stay on this platform?" They're talking about their specific DBMS and about MV in general. This is a confirmation that the policies these companies have for developers directly affects their longer-term revenue, and ours.

For more confirmation of how this works in the bigger picture, most software these days is offered to developers or free because most companies (even Microsoft) have learned that a healthy developer ecosystem allows a platform to flourish amongst end-users, the people who are really paying for use. Quite simply, when you have a lot of developers, there are more software options for end-users, more products from which to choose, more to use, more to discuss, more buzz, more people carrying your marketing messages around. When you venture into such an ecosystem you see more more more and it's a no brainer for end-user decision makers to make a home there. Compare this to platforms where it's difficult for developers to create offerings. There's no buzz, no masses of third-party offerings, no ecosystem. This is all quite obvious to anyone who actually spends a little time looking at the rest of the world, not to bean counters who have a myopic view focused only on their own offerings.

Dawn : I understand your interest in capitalizing on a thread like this but the point is that we need D3 and other platforms to support a variety of end-users to whom we provide services. Another platform is nice to consider for various reasons but it doesn't help us to support users who are on this platform. That said, it's good for people to know their options.

T

[Dawn Wolthuis]

Yes, I did not want to hijack the thread, so it was only after I noticed so many saying to move to OpenQM that I thought some might be interested in another option currently being rolled out by invitation.  So, yes, D3 is the question. OpenQM is an option. Contact me off list if interested in an emerging option, and I will not respond again on this thread. Thanks.  --dawn

Typed on a mobile keyboard

--

[Peter McMurray]

I am stunned that nobody from Rocket has bothered to announce this to the developers. Apparently I will get a major shock come April.

This despite having done major beta work in the past and been a faithful supporter of Pick for nigh on 40 years. The Microsoft version since it appeared.

A very stupid decision.

[Peter McMurray]

MAJOR WARNING DO NOT ATTEMPT TO CHECK YOUR D3 DEVELOPER ACTIVATION STATUS THROUGH THE USUAL ACTIVATION SCREEN.

IT WILL GO INTO AN ETERNAL LOOP AND DESTROY YOUR SYSTEM ON WINDOWS 

[Charlie Noah]

Ouch, Peter, that's awful! I assume you're speaking from experience. If this really happens, and I'm not doubting you, what in the world is Rocket trying to do?

On 02-18-2016 2:33 PM, Peter McMurray wrote:

MAJOR WARNING DO NOT ATTEMPT TO CHECK YOUR D3 DEVELOPER ACTIVATION STATUS THROUGH THE USUAL ACTIVATION SCREEN.

IT WILL GO INTO AN ETERNAL LOOP AND DESTROY YOUR SYSTEM ON WINDOWS 

[Kevin Powick]

On Thursday, 18 February 2016 14:45:08 UTC-5, Peter McMurray wrote:

I am stunned that nobody from Rocket has bothered to announce this to the developers.

When I said the same thing to the rep at Rocket, they said the notification went out to their partners over a year ago. Well, that doesn't help those of us that aren't partners.  We had no idea this change was coming.

 

Apparently I will get a major shock come April.

It was a shock to me.  My system expired this month, and when I went to renew it, I was told about the policy change.

In fairness, I'm now being told that Rocket might be able to work with me on the pricing, but I have nothing concrete from them yet.

--

Kevin Powick

[Tony Gravagno]

Dawn Wolthuis wrote:

>So, yes, D3 is the question. OpenQM is an option. Contact me off list if interested in an emerging option, and I will not respond again on this thread.

As I said, this applies to all Rocket DBMS platforms, not just D3.

It would be interesting to know what independent U2 and mvBase developers are thinking about this. I suspect the pain isn't as great. These days I have more U2 clients than D3. These sites almost never quibble about pricing. They just ask for work to be done and they pay the bills. D3 sites (and resellers) tend to use a budget-first approach to project development and then there's a lot of time spent discussing hours and dollars later. I'm not saying U2 sites have deeper pockets, nor that they're getting any less value for their dollar. I'm just saying culturally they're already accustomed to paying for what they use (having been through IBM, etc) so most of them left the "IT on a shoestring" concept behind long ago. Consider that more D3 sites tend to leave for QM and other platforms citing cost, where for U2 that's almost unheard-of - in public anyway. So the cost of U2-related developer tools can be considered a basic cost of business, where with D3 it's more like an investment that we hope doesn't result in being an expense. If D3 sites would only recognize the power of the platform (with inspiration from their "value-add" resellers and Rocket) then that audience might find more developers and more solutions. They'd then be more inclined to continue paying their yearly maintenance fees, and to commission more projects - and that would eliminate the need for threads like this one.

Finally, as I noted previously, if you sell the DBMS platform to end-users (that is, you are an OEM) then you don't need to pay retail price for the tools. If your request to be an OEM has been declined, then you're right in there with a mass of developers that are not regarded as contributing to the Rocket revenue stream. Ultimately That is the real problem here. The pricing is just a consequence of how they evaluate their partner relationships. That's what you should be addressing if this topic distresses you.

Sigh - Whatevah.

T

[Glen Batchelor]

   The entire development world has been misguided, abused and left behind to create solutions that are either:

1) extremely simple and feature lacking, with a single process to deploy for a single issue

2) extremely and overly complicated, parameter driven based on general business rules with a finite scope of logic modification

  #1 applies to developers and to power users who need to fix 1 business process efficiency issue.

  #2 applies to upper management that don't fully understand the requirements and direction of their business and want "something that works, with an upgrade path". (upgrade paths are snake oil, but don't get me started on that)

  It's not even a D3 or OpenQM issue. It's an industry issue and developers have let it happen by taking the largest check they can find instead of seeing the highway they were helping construct, which leads away from technology progression, adoption and education.

[David Knight]

I'm a d3 var/oem; so I have a point of view. First, in general; the most important thing to me for any supplier of my business-critical tools is I need them to remain commercially viable. I had enjoyed  many years of having a 100% free timed developer license; but tbh always thought that odd given the market we are in. No, I did not really get a clear warning of the license change, but was used to going through an annual re-licence process. As an OEM I receive a substantial discount off RRP for the licenses I chose to purchase; and will get the same substantial discounts on AMC renewals.

In short, I'm with those like Richard W who think this is a tool which brinbgs value to my business, and find the overall reaction here a little curious. Nobody likes change, I guess. But when this happened to me, I did not feel a righteous indignation; or whatever it is many appear to be feeling. To each his own I guess.

Those who do not qualify as OEM's must presumably be working for clients who do have systems and could use their systems for dev [different accounts of course!]. Or it simply becomes a small cost of doing business. Or if the code is transportable, use one of the open or more free systems to build generic code and transplant?

As for the rest of the world getting free licenses; it's been a while but I know I had to by MS licenses for their tools. I even joined their developer program, and got 'everything'; but for a [substantial] fee.

So, on balance; for me, sorry I just don;t get what the problem is. I pay for electricity, fuel, paper, internet, etc etc etc. Of course I look for a better deal, but free is not always a better deal.

My 2c

Cheers,

David

On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 10:32:18 AM UTC+11, Kevin Powick wrote:

[Kevin Powick]

On Thursday, 18 February 2016 16:51:35 UTC-5, David Knight wrote:

.

So, on balance; for me, sorry I just don;t get what the problem is. I pay for electricity, fuel, paper, internet, etc etc etc. Of course I look for a better deal, but free is not always a better deal.

Have any of your development tools suddenly jumped in cost by a factor of 20? That's the problem. Other than in the MV world, I would say all of my tools have gone down significantly in price over the years. Why is Rocket going the other direction?

As I said before, to get what I used to in my D3 license from Rocket cost $500.00. Now that configuration will cost close to $10,000. A 20 fold increase with no warning. Similar to what Tony G. mentioned, I don't need a 10 user system, but even with fewer users and add-ons like OpenDB, my cost would at least quadruple.

I also don't see the logic behind the policy change other than some "bean counter" looking to increase revenue on the backs of the people that write the software that helps to sell their platform. Unlike physical tools, there are no material costs for electronic goods. It's not like Rocket was providing deeply discounted hammers and saws to carpenters.

--
Kevin Powick

[Kevin Powick]

After speaking with the Rocket representative newly assigned to my account, I'm in a much better mood today.  It appears that we will be able to work out a relationship that is more financially palatable than what I was looking at a few days ago.

I appreciate that Rocket was willing to consider our history and work with me on this.

--

Kevin Powick

[Peter McMurray]

Hi

I have spoken to my supplier and established that there is a developer price. I have always insisted on my users paying the annual maintenance fee as much for insurance as anything else - it gives them access to the major supplier if we have a problem.

Regarding the crash when using Activation which would normally come up with a current status; after considerable assistance from the support, now MBS previously TData, we established that it wrecked the D3 RPC call. After several attempts using d3vme options we removed everything and re-installed from scratch. Luckily I practice what I preach and had a pseudo tape backup, however Mike Raffaele showed me a neat way of salvaging FSI accounts using Windows Explorer - another good reason for steering clear of vme accounts :-) . I still suspect the new registration changes as I had been told by another support chap that my activation numbers were invalid. Thank heavens it was Friday and not the week-end although I can think of better ways to spend 4 hours.

[David Knight]

You make some valid points.

I hope you are able to find a commercial resolution.

[David Knight]

Hi Pete,

Which makes it sound like you are an OEM; which is a good thing; so I guess Rocket would look at that favourably.

[David Knight]

I'm glad you found an outcome that satisfied you; as you were clearly put out by this.

Well done.