I know just the question is a bit of heresey, but I'm curious...
Sure, there are the express editions. But when Microsoft is effectively competing for 'hearts and minds' in an OSS world, it seems more than a bit counterproductive to charge devs who wholeheartedly support .NET high subscription fees for Microsoft software. It's hard to imagine that, in the context of Microsoft's overall sales, dev licenses represent such a significant revenue stream as to justify the downsides.
So my question is: do you know of any instances where MSDN subscription rates have deterred a team from adopting .NET for a project - where cost played a role in a decision to go OSS instead?
I think MS has made huge inroads to making .Net cheaper to access and work with. With competent Express versions of Visual Studio and Sql Server, the only thing you need to pay for is Windows itself (both in your dev environment and server/production environment).
The only thing holding .Net back now is it may not be the right tool for every job regardless of cost.
It does to me. It makes me ask maybe I should try and become a Microsoft MVP because they get all the software for free.
You can't buy Expression Blend and Design for anything but the highest level on the License and that just ticks me off.
I don't think so, especially with the empower program for small ISVs -- $375 gets you 5 MSDN licenses and other goodies. After that there are Microsoft Action Packs as well as the entire partner program.
I've always gotten legal, free copies of Visual Studio. You can either download the Express versions which will handle most people's needs or go to the Launch events where they literally give out copies to everyone who shows up.
.NET Framework is a free download, so really the only thing left is a box running Windows.. and I'd be willing to bet that you've got one of those kicking around somewhere.
There's no reason to purchase an MSDN subscription.
It's not a barrier to entry, but it certainly represents a glass ceiling. You get a lot of things with the Express editions, but not EVERYTHING. There's a lot of little perks that come with the Pro versions - addins for instance +cough+ Resharper +cough+. I'd say you need Visual Studio 20xx Pro at a minimum to do any mid-range to Enterprise level development.
The cost of MS developer tools was the sole reason behind my Year of Linux. It's tough seeing all the free development tools for Linux, OS X and Java. If my job didn't depend on keeping up to date with .NET, I'd leave it for dead in a heartbeat.
In my view MSDN subscriptions are not a huge deterrant, as not only are there express editions, there are also trial versions of most products, and I think a basic MSDN subscription is not that expensive.
However licencing costs and licencing complexity of certain developer tools as well as certain products can be a huge obstacle which unfortunately is often not thought about at the beginning of projects.
I am aware of a number of projects which have chosen alternative technologies due to licencing costs and licencing complexity.
I'm currently on the Empower program but I'll be paying the full fare when it runs out
for the same reason I pay A$800/year for an AutoCAD subscription - it easily saves me more time & hassle than it costs in the long run by having everything I need at my fingertips.
I think I'm getting value for money when I consider both the licenses as well as the community - most of which I suppose is free anyway.
I consider it a legitimate cost of running my business and it's tax-deductible anyway.
I am trying to restart my career, my life, etc and my previous MSDN Universal sub expired in 2005. At the time it expired, I stopped working for a while. That coincided with Microsoft changing the cost and structure of that subscription program. To acquire a similar subscription today is out of the question. I do not have the funds. I am currently developing with old technology (VB6 and ASP) and will do so until I have the funds to purchase the MSDN sub that I want. I have downloaded the "express" versions of VS 2008 and SQL 2008 but, lets be frank, any serious developer is going to want to utilize the features that arent available in "express". In exploring this issue here on StackOverflow, I have seen others talk about the Empower program. It looks promising and I shall investigate it.
But, yes, the barrier to entry is the cost. Hopefully Empower lowers that, for a while. I agree with the requirement that after it expires I will need to pay full fare. I think thats only fair.
Related
We've recently started to support a PowerBuilder 10.5 application and the question has come whether or not we should think about alternatives or keep the app running in PB 10.5. It is a classic PB app; an administrative software, build upon an Oracle DB.
Right now, the app works great, but there are two reasons why we reconsider:
The sole developer of this app is about to retire. He's the only one
who has all the PB-knowledge to support this app.
We might want to improve the offered services of the app. So integrations with other tools are right around the corner.
I'm not very familiar with PB, but I've read it (only the newest versions) is now supported by Appeon. The latest version is now 2017 R3, with a 2019 version coming up.
I'm wondering what the pro's & con's are of trying to update the current 10.5 version to the latest version. Is it worth it to update? Or what are the pro's & con's of sticking to the 10.5 version?
Or should we consider moving to a newer technology, since so few Powerbuilders are to be found nowadays? And if so, what technology would you advise?
Rather than just differences between the older and newer PB-versions, I'm looking for motivations to upgrade/migrate/do nothing at all.
Thanks.
So, there's no clear cut answer, but we can throw around some ideas on the non-technical bullet points (as requested).
Staying on 10.5: There's a lot to be said for "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." If it works and you're happy with what it does, don't move it.
However, since you've said that you're planning on moving it forward, you might want to consider that 10.5 doesn't support current operating systems (within a year, Windows systems currently supported by MS will be only Win8 and Win10), which were nothing but figments of imagination when 10.5 was out. Your 10.5 app may work on Win10 now, but that's solely because of MS's work on backward compatibility for apps, and that you haven't leveraged an area in PB that had a problem in a then-future version of Windows. If you need to add functionality, being on a version that at least suggests that it works on your operating system could be helpful.
Parallel argument for databases, the exception being that if your app uses SQL Anywhere, the database that used to come for free in several PB packages. It is now something you'd have to purchase separately.
One thing to remember about trying to move forward with an old version of anything is support. If you get stuck, the vendor will basically not talk to you, and the peer community has been shrinking, so you've got less chance of getting into a dialog with fellow developers.
Upgrading: Upgrading is usually a minor effort. The most frequent reasons I've seen exceptions to this: deprecated functionality, and coding that depends on behaviours that didn't stay consistent between versions (some behaviours are promised to stay consistent, but not all). Run a migration test with a trail version with your PB expert to get that question off the table.
One thing to keep in mind when upgrading is that the licensing model has changed. PB used to have a perpetual model (buy once, use forever), but it's now a subscription model. Whether this is an improvement for you or not is up to you to figure out.
Whether it is "worth it" to upgrade, in my mind it usually boils down to
OS support
DB support
vendor support
peer support
deprecated features, and whether I use them
new features, and whether I would use them (and you asked us not to discuss these last two items, which need to be weighed very individually anyway, and are well documented on Appeon's site)
"Migrating": I've put "migrating" in quotes, because I don't believe there's a technology that lets you "migrate" in the sense of a code translation. (I'll let you read one of my old tirades about wanting to "migrate" off PB.) What I'll talk about here is rewriting in a new technology. Both pulling business rules out of an old PB system and redesigning/rewriting in another technology is a big effort.
The biggest argument in favour these days is getting and keeping PowerBuilder talent. Getting people with PB under their belt is hard, and judging legitimate talent is challenging, even with someone with PB on your side of the interview table. (Leverage your retiring guy if you want to move forward with PB.) Training someone with PB is no small task either. Someone once asked me, not an educator, if I could come up with a course and train his team in a week. I laughed. After a two week course designed and given by professional educators from the then-vendor Powersoft, I came home and wrote incredibly embarrassing code. I also needed lots of time practicing, and getting feedback from my peers. If you can get someone or train someone, if they are only doing PB work a couple of weeks per year, those PB "muscles" will atrophy. No matter the technical arguments of PB vs something else, if you can't get PB talent to maintain it, PB is a dead end.
I'm afraid I'm not one to suggest an alternative technology. It used to be that, in terms of of rich client apps, you couldn't go wrong with choosing Microsoft, but since then, MS has sent the development community on some wild goose chases, that have ended in deprecated technologies. I wouldn't want to be the guy looking into the future to guess.
Good luck.
I would recommend migrating.
You will find several companies that offer migration to both java and .net which are the leading platforms.
In terms of UI for me currently the only option is web. Using other technologies does not make a lot of sense.
If your company uses a lot of MS stack, like MS OS, SQL server. Exchange, Sharepoint etc I will recommend migrating to C# otherwise migrating to Java makes more sense
Terry's answer is quite good but the point about migration was not addressed with respect to the new features in PowerBuilder 2019.
One major feature of PowerBuilder 2019 is a C# DataStore (compatible with .NET Core) and DataWindow object migration utility. The C# DataStore has the same APIs and transaction mechanism as the PowerScript DataStore. It is documented in detail on the Appeon Website: https://www.appeon.com/support/documents/appeon_online_help/powerbuilder/api_reference/PowerBuilder.Data/DataStore/IDataStore/IDataStore.html
Should you decide C# is the way to go, this feature of PowerBuilder 2019 makes the migration effort a "port" of the PowerScript non-visual code rather than a rewrite (for the reasons mentioned above).
Here is example PowerScript code:
public function datastore of_retrieve (date ad_start, date ad_end, decimal adec_amt);
Datastore lds
lds = Create Datastore
lds.dataobject = "d_order_customer"
lds.SetTransObject(SQLCA)
lds.Retrieve(ad_start, ad_end, adec_amt)
Return lds
end function
Here is the same example in C# using the C# DataStore:
public IDataStore GetOrderCustomerInfo(DateTime startDate, DateTime endDate, decimal amount)
{
IDataStore dataStore = new DataStore("d_order_customer", _context);
dataStore.Retrieve(startDate, endDate, amount);
return dataStore;
}
I've been programming in .NET professionally for three years and am always looking to sharpen my tools. I'm a sole developer for a company that recently purchased a MSDN subscription along with Visual Studio 2008 Professional. In what ways can the subscription be useful?
I'm used to googling 80% of the day to figure out how to do what I want to do, and I've learned a ton that way. I'm having trouble seeing what the subscription gains me.
An MSDN subscription provides much more than simply an offline version of their documentation. You get access to nearly all relevant software that Microsoft makes including Windows, SQL Server, Office, etc. It also includes previous versions, as well as versions that are not yet released to the public.
It's great for testing, developing for a new platform, and for learning about new features in other Microsoft products in which you may not normally be exposed to.
The MSDN subscription isn't necessarily about access to documentation but it gives you a few key pieces of functionality.
Software licenses for Visual Studio, Office, Windows, etc.
Technical Support Incidents - For when you can't answer the question
MSDN Magazine Subscription (Yes you can get this outside of this as well)
I'm sure that there are some other things, but the license and support benefits are by far the "reasons" to have a MSDN subscription.
If you really want to grow your ability as a .NET developer the best way is to spend time around other developers using the same toolset. There are just too many tools in the .NET environment to experience them all yourself. Especially since you don't have other co-workers explorering the .NET environment with you.
If I were you, I'd check the web for any .NET user's groups located near you and attend their meetings. Those can be great places to pick up new ideas/ways of using the tools.
Among other things you get a license for Visual Studio and Office. You also get access to a wide range of operating systems and applications you may use to test your own software. For instance you may want to test your software on different versions of Windows, or if you develop software for Exchange Server you probably need to install this product without having to buy a full production license just to be able to develop software.
There are a couple of questions on Stackoverflow asking whether x (Ruby / Drupal) technology is 'enterprise ready'.
I would like to ask how is 'enterprise ready' defined.
Has anyone created their own checklist?
Does anyone have a benchmark that they test against?
"Enterprise Ready" for the most part means can we run it reliably and effectively within a large organisation.
There are several factors involved:
Is it reliable?
Can our current staff support it, or do we need specialists?
Can it fit in with our established security model?
Can deployments be done with our automated tools?
How easy is it to administer? Can the business users do it or do we need a specialist?
If it uses a database, is it our standard DB, or do we need to train up more specialists?
Depending on how important the system is to the business the following question might also apply:
Can it be made highly available?
Can it be load balanced?
Is it secure enough?
Open Source projects often do not pay enough attention to the difficulties of deploying and running software within a large organisation. e.g. Most OS projects default to MySql as the database, which is a good and sensible choice for most small projects, however, if your Enterprise has an ORACLE site license and a team of highly skilled ORACLE DBAs in place the MySql option looks distinctly unattractive.
To be short:
"Enterprise ready" means: If it crashes, the enterprises using it will possibly sue you.
Most of the time the "test", if it may really be called as such, is that some enterprise (=large business), has deployed a successful and stable product using it. So its more like saying its proven its worth on the battlefield, or something like that. In other words the framework has been used successfully, or not in the real world, you can't just follow some checklist and load tests and say its enterprise ready.
Like Robert Gould says in his answer, it's "Enterprise-ready" when it's been proven by some other huge project. I'd put it this way: if somebody out there has made millions of dollars with it and gotten written up by venture capitalist magazines as the year's (some year, not necessarily this one) hottest new thing, then it's Enterprise-ready. :)
Another way to look at the question is that a tech is Enterprise-ready when a non-tech boss or business owner won't worry about whether or not they've chosen a good platform to run their business on. In this sense Enterprise-ready is a measure of brand recognition rather than technological maturity.
Having built a couple "Enterprise" applications...
Enterprise outside of development means, that if it breaks, someone can fix it. I've worked with employers/contractors that stick with quite possibly the worst managing hosting providers, data vendors, or such because they will fix problems when they crop up, even if they crop up a lot it, and have someone to call when they break.
So to restate it another way, Enterprise software is Enterprisey because it has support options available. A simple example: jQuery isn't enterprisey while ExtJS is, because ExtJS has a corporate support structure to it. (Yes I know these two frameworks is like comparing a toolset to a factory manufactured home kit ).
As my day job is all about enterprise architecture, I believe that the word enterprise isn't nowadays about size nor scale but refers more to how a software product is sold.
For example, Ruby on Rails isn't enterprise because there is no vendor that will come into your shop and do Powerpoint presentations repeatedly for the developer community. Ruby on Rails doesn't have a sales executive that takes me out to the golf course or my favorite restaurant for lunch. Ruby on Rails also isn't deeply covered by industry analyst firms such as Gartner.
Ruby on Rails will never be considered "enterprise" until these things occur...
From my experience, "Enterprise ready" label is an indicator of the fear of managers to adopt an open-source technology, possibly balanced with a desire not to stay follower in that technology.
This may objectively argued with considerations such as support from a third party company or integration in existing development tools.
I suppose an application could be considered "enterprise ready" when it is stable enough that a large company would use it. It would also imply some level of support, so when it does inevitable break.
Wether or not something is "enterprise ready" is entirely subjective, and undefined, and rather "buzz word'y".. Basically, you can't have a test_isEnterpriseReady() - just make your application as reliable and efficient as it can be..
Assume your .NET-based development team is already using the following set of tools in its processes:
Subversion / TortoiseSVN / VisualSVN (source control)
NUnit (unit testing)
An open source Wiki
A proprietary bug-tracking system that is paid for
You are happy with Subversion and NUnit, but dislike the Wiki and bug-tracking system. You also would like to add some lightweight project-management software (like Fogbugz/Trac) - it does not have to be free, but obviously cheaper is better.
Can you make a compelling argument for adopting VSTS, either to add missing features and replace disliked software or to handle everything (including the source control)? Is the integration of all these features greater than the sum of the parts, or would it simply be better to acquire and replace the parts that you either do not like or do not have?
I remember looking into VSTS a few years ago and thought it was terribly expensive and not really better than many of the free options, but I assume Microsoft has continued to work on it?
VSTS is great, if you do everything in it. Unfortunately the price has not become better over the years. :( The CAL's are still ludicrously expensive. The only improvement is that if a person uses only the work item system, and works only with his/her own work items (no peeking at other person's work items!) then there is no need for a CAL. This makes it a bit easier to use it as an external bugreport system. Still it leaves a lot to be desired in this area.
There is one way to alleviate the cost - become Microsoft Certified Partner. If you are a simple partner, you get 5 VS/TFS licenses for free; if you are a Gold Certifiend Partner, you get 25 (if memory fails me not). That should be enough for most companies. But getting the Gold status might be tricky, depending on what you do.
If you only dislike those two parts, then perhaps it's better just to find a replacement for them instead for everything? There are many wiki systems out there, some should be to your liking. The same goes for bugtracking too.
We are extremely happy with not only the tools, but the integration that Team Foundation Server, and the various Team Editions have given us. We previously used Borland's StarTeam for source control and issue tracking with a 3rd party wiki, the name of which escapes me at the moment.
It came time for us to extend our licensing and support agreement with Borland, only to learn that the cost of adding users to our license and upgrading the product would cost us as much (a little more, actually) than biting the bullet and making the switch. One thing to consider is that you would normally pay for the development tools to begin with, so the cost is partially absorbed by our budget.
We also did not feel the need for getting Team Suite for every person. You might want to consider it for the developers, but other disciplines don't really have a benefit in using all of the tools in most companies.
We were able to get the appropriate team editions for twelve people, enough CALs for 50 users (for Team Explorer, Teamprise, Team Project Portals, Team Web Access), Teamprise for the five Mac Users that we have, and the Team Foundation Server software itself for under six figures. Considering that includes the developer tools that we normally would be buying, it was a good deal.
The upfront cost on new licensing also covered two years, so we could split the budget between the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years. The very important thing is to make sure not to let the licenses lapse, as the renewals on licenses cost a fraction of the initial cost and also include version upgrades.
As to the features, we are in the process of rolling out. About half of our department completed training, and I have already started migrating projects over. The development team absolutely loves the features and tight integration with their workflow. Version control is a snap, and work items (and their related reporting artifacts) are extensible to the nth degree. The fact that TFS relies heavily on bringing sanity to workflow management helps to tie in all of the processes to a level that you just can not get with multiple vendors.
My absolute favorite thing, though, is the extensibility model. Using the Team Foundation Server API, you can easily write check-in policies, write tools to interface with the system, develop plug-ins, and more. We are already seeing gains in productivity and the quality of our products through a minimal implementation.
Still on the horizon, though, is integrating Team Build. I have yet to set up a build project, but it seems to be seamless and painless. Time will tell... :-)
Edit - I forgot to mention that our migration to TFS includes licensing for the Test Load Agent. The load testing functionality within Team Test is one of, if not the absolute best that I have seen.
Where I'm at, we've settled on the following:
SVN for source control
Redmine for bug-tracking and wiki
NUnit for unit testing
CruiseControl.NET for our build server
Redmine is an open source Ruby on Rails application that supports multiple projects much better than Trac and seems to be much easier to administer. It's definitely worth checking out.
VSTS seems to be way too much money compared to other products. As an additional benefit, you also get the souce with open source solutions, which allows you to modify things to fit your need if the capability isn't there yet.
I'd stick with SVN and use trac or bugzilla or fogbugz. You could also do a trial of team server. In my opinion it is not worth the money. MS had their chance with version control and they screwed it up a long time ago. Too late to the party if you ask me and frankly I am not impressed with how they try to control all your development experience in the IDE with "integration" to the source control. I prefer the perforce/SVN and separate defect tracking solution.
With all that said, you probably can't go wrong with any of the following:
bugzilla or trac or fogbugz AND SVN
MS team thingamabob
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
As a long time Microsoft developer, I find MSDN to be an invaluable resource.
However, when tinkering at home I am not able to play with the best latest technologies and the different offerings coming from Microsoft as I cannot justify paying such a hefty price for what is essentially a pastime.
The Express editions are great, but fall flat when trying to use the more advanced feature I am used to from the versions I use at work. I cannot get the latest betas and play with the new offerings, not legally, anyway.
Apart from getting an MVP, how would one go about getting an MSDN subscription for an acceptable price for a non-professional environment?
I am aware of the Empower program, but I thought it was geared towards getting commercial software to market. If this is not the case, it appears like the way for me to go. Thanks!
MSDN subscriptions are per user rather than per device so as long as you're the only person using them I think you should be free to use them at home. I'm not aware of any differentiation being applied to the workplace, unless of course your workplace itself lays down such a rule.
From http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/subscriptions/aa948867.aspx:
MSDN Subscriptions are licensed to
individuals who may install the
provided software without restriction.
Software provided through MSDN
Subscriptions is licensed for design,
development, test and demonstration of
your applications.
See also http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/subscriptions/aa948864.aspx.
There is an Empower program that Microsoft has available. It gives you several Premium subscriptions for cheap, with the catch that you have to be an ISV working towards an actual product.
This (Not available anymore - broken link) gives you all the software you'll need for development, and even a few "real world" licenses for certain apps (like Office)
After a couple of years, you have to pay full price though. The logic being that you should have a product on the market, and can afford it.
+1 Luke's comment about using work MSDN license at home. I think that's the best answer for the OP.
Also consider
DreamSpark (for students): http://www.dreamspark.com
BizSpark (for startups building "next gen web apps"): http://www.bizspark.com
Empower (for ISVs wanting to partner with Microsoft): http://www.empowerforisv.com
(Note there is some overlap between BizSpark and Empower ... many ISVs will find them both useful)
And finally ... don't overlook trial versions and VHD's. Most Microsoft software is available for trial (30-360 days). Many are available via the "VHD Test Drive"
VHD Test Drive: http://microsoft.com/vhd
Check out the Microsoft Action Pack Development and Design subscription. It is designed to replace the Empower program and gives you access to some MS products at a great price point.
https://partner.microsoft.com/global/40132997
In agreement with comments already made - get an Empower subscription, it's geared up towards people like yourself. As I recall, you have 2 years to bring a product/solution to market (where market is very loosely defined) that uses some element of MS technology (again, where this is quite loosely defined). In return for quite a modest outlay, you get MSDN, a bunch of OS licenses and access to development tools and end-user application programs (XP, Vista, Office being obvious examples).
For instance, I develop in Delphi but write code to run on SQL Express 2005 and full-blown SQL Server 2005+, and this entitles me to purchase an Empower agreement. I get all the goodies, plus things like Visual Studio, SQL Server, Office and OS licenses. If you don't bring a solution to market in the time allocated, you can pay to extend your agreement or... well, I must admit I'm not sure. It's hard to see what bad thing can befall you if you try to produce something but ultimately fail - it's the American dream, right? You have to stop using the software at the end of the period, etc. :-)
If you want to develop for desktop Windows you really need some level of MSDN access, or a good broadband connection and some patience while you access the online materials. Empower is a fairly pain-free method of getting your hands on all the best tools for very little outlay indeed - you end up with a large pile of DVDs and CDs, and a few updates during the year. I'd say it was an essential purchase - particularly if this is viewed as a career investment, or some element of training or progression. It's not a lot of money at all (I speak as an ISV - everything I have to pay out truly comes from my pocket!).
You may want to talk to your boss about your opportunities to join MSDN for free. I work at a company using all Microsoft Software, and I get a free subscription, which comes with access to almost all of microsoft's software.
If you have an MSDN subscription at work, odds are good that your subscription license has a provision for you to be able to install things at home as well.
I know with our subscriptions here I'm allowed to install copies of operating systems and development tools at home since I obviously can't use the copies at work and at home at the same time.
Edit: I'm assuming that since you said you were a longtime MSDN developer that you are currently employed doing development on Microsoft platforms.
Even with just one licence you can get MSDN Under a Volume Licence. This is cheaper and (depending on exactly which VL program) can allow the cost to be spread across the VL period (once fully paid the licences become permanent).
Also means you get the VL builds and keys for Office/Windows rather than just the retail.
Many MVP's have gift subscriptions that they can give away, so it pays off to be visible in the community.
Speak at your local user group, start (or participate) in an open source project, start a blog... just generally get your name out there.
Eventually you'll get one (or an MVP :)).
What I've found is that if you pay attention there are plenty of opportunities to snag a free copy of Office or Visual Studio at local Microsoft events.
Good luck!