SAP needs to get a reality check on their pricing for PowerBuilder. Recent news this week from Microsoft has indicated significant price cuts on Visual Studio 2015. For example: Visual Studio Community 2015, is on par with Visual Studio Community 2013 and will remain free. Visual Studio Professional 2015 will cost $1,199 and correspond fairly directly with Video Studio Professional 2013.

    IMHO: PB needs a) a free version and b) enterprise price that should be at or just under VS Professional (as PB does not compare to VS Ultimate feature wise).

Microsoft Reveals Visual Studio 2015 Editions and Pricing, Drops Ultimate Tier — ADTmag

To report this post you need to login first.

48 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. no new power

    yes, it is overpriced compared to VS.

    PB is only selling to existing PB application customers that are expanding.

    There is no new pb shop opening.

    They can charge higher since quantity is very low (compared to VS).

    Similarly, Appeon can charge whatever they want!

    (0) 
    1. Aron Cox

      Now I suspect I’m going to get bashed for this, but why all the love for Powerbuilder and why do you think it is better than any other language?

      I’ve been a Powerbuilder developer for many. many years and I know it pretty well. For the last couple of years I’ve been slowly learning C#, and from the little I already know I’m hugely impressed, .NET is excellent – I don’t see any advantage to using Powerbuilder except for the fact that I know it so well already. Why would anyone decide Powerbuilder is the right tool to use for a new project?

      Now my guess is that people will say the following:

      The datawindow – there’s nothing out there as good as the datawindow.

      I really don’t buy this, there are plenty on ways of storing, manipulating and displaying data in .NET that can do all the things the datawindow does and more, and they have loads of extra modern features built into to them that the datawindow does not. Yes using the datawindow can get you displaying data much more quickly than fiddling with code in .NET but the datawindow is not really an exterprise level object, we have manged to squeeze it into that arena, but it has a number of issues e.g. . the syntax is not easily parsable and manipulated; you can’t display many types of data in the column without using OLE; why doesn’t a datawindows inherited from a datastore; and various other annoying things I’ve had to workaround over the years.

      Powerbuilder – it’s faster to get something up and running.

      I agree, although I think a part of that is because .NET developers have been trained to think in a multi-tier way which slows them down at the beginning but which may well produce better long-term code in the end. I don’t think the quality of Powerbuilder code is any better than the quality of .NET code I’ve seen, and I’d hazard a guess that on average it’s slightly worse if only becuase there is a lot of information out there on how to write good .NET code and not much for Powerbuilder. On top of that modern applications are often utilizing the web and web services and HTML and all that other new stuff I’ve been avoiding as much as possible. Powerbuilder (discounting Powerbuilder .NET which is really just .NET with a datawindow) just isn’t playing in those spaces.

      So please tell me why I’m wrong and why even if Powerbuilder was free I should go to my manager an suggest we should use Powerbuilder over .NET for a new project?

      Is Powerbuilder really any better or we just avoiding change?

      (0) 
      1. David Peace

        Hi Aron

        Your question and points are a good one. Sure part of the issue is that we are happy with what we know.

        I have dabbled a little with c# and .Net and in some cases it is very cleaver and delivers good code quickly, but in others it is very long winded and to be quite frank very difficult to understand when picking up someone else’s code.

        We at Powersoft pick up other people’s tired and forgotten systems and bring them back to life and support them. I have only had one application in PB that was near impossible to understand what was going on. However, nearly every c# or VB application is very difficult to understand. The key problem is that they all use some different 3rd party framework in order to get productivity in the development. As a result you need to fully understand the framework in order to understand the code.

        Clearly this is not a problem if you have developed the system with the framework in the first place, but from a maintenance point of view it is an issue. The framework is key to the developer’s understanding and ability to make changes effectively.

        So in conclusion, PB is fast to develop and because of it’s simplicity (and perhaps shortfalls) it is easy to maintain too. A PB application is very robust because the underlying engine is strong.

        .Net development does take longer and is definitely more difficult to maintain. The resilience of the application is often dependant on the framework used and how good that is. You need to have the right framework versions and everything right for it to be stable. As a result it is too easy to upset the applications environment and cause it to become less reliable.

        Having said that, quite clearly there is a lot of .Net code out there and the code I have developed myself is doing the job it was built for well. I would happily choose c# to develop specific elements of an application as I would also use the database language to perform tasks at that level too. But when it comes to developing an application to capture and manipulate data for business I would always choose PB. It’s about using the right tool for the job, you wouldn’t use a garden fork to dig a hole.

        Really the question you should ask is why do so many people use Java? 😉

        Cheers

        David

        (0) 
        1. Aron Cox

          Thanks David.

          Interesting, I can no longer think of a reason for using Powerbuilder to develop a business app. Microsoft have improved .NET a lot since I first looked at it, and if I was given a new project, a new programmer and a choice of languages I just can’t see how I could justify picking Powerbuilder, even if it was free! I also can’t see how SAP / Appeon can do anything to rectify that situation unless they managed to turn it into the most feature rich, easy to use language there is, and be lucky as that comes into it, which is a big ask.

          It’s a shame, but mostly it’s due to the fact that the world moved on, and programming languages are one of those things that have a lifespan. Us programmers have to keep moving too, which can get a bit tiring some days. Who knows what we’ll be using 15 years from now.

          Of course if I personally were told I have x days to write a new application I would probably do it in Powerbuilder because I know it so well 🙂

          (0) 
  2. David Peace

    Lack of supply is the biggest issue, the fact that PB houses cannot get PB is forcing them to move away.

    PB is not competing with VS, if you do not use PB you will not start now!

    (0) 
        1. Chris Pollach Post author

          Hi Andreas;

          Yes I do … but definitely not by SAP.

          IMHO: you would need to (off the top-of-my-head):

          a) Reduce the price by 50%

          b) Remove SYSAM

          c) Create an Express version

          d) Get rid of PB.Net

             (VS2010 Shell isn’t cutting it – its 2015 now,

              Very low adoption rate,

              PB Community doesn’t need another C/S tool

              WPF is “dead”)

          e) Add Web capabilities

          f) Add Mobile capabilities

          g) Improve AutoScript (like Intellisense) in PB Classic (its almost there)

          h) Create educational “how to videos” on YouTube

          j) Add prime 545 enhancement suggestions listed on the ISUG-Tech PB enhancement list

          k) Give the product away to Students, Colleges & Consultants (ie NFR’s)

          l) Bring back the Desktop & Professional versions

          m) Bring back Distributed PB, “C” User Object (now C#),

          n) Add WCF to PB Classic

          o) Add full & transparent J2EE and .Net “Interop”

          p) Add jScript support to PB

          etc

          (just to mention a few things I would do if I had the product)  😉

          Oh yeah … and run a FULL and OPEN Betas!

          Regards … Chris

          (0) 
          1. Lars Mosegaard

            Hey Chris,

            I totally agree; apart from a)

            My objection to a) is that 50% reduction in price still makes it way too expensive. Even with the free NFR version to students and old teachers like us.

            Bring back certification and make the license go with the consultant or employee.

            Have you ever called in an electrician and he asks to use your powertools?

            Lars

            (0) 
            1. Chris Pollach Post author

              Hi Lars;

                I agree .. the price should be a little more competitive. I was trying to say “at least” a 50%  reduction.  😉

                I like your certification idea. I would give everyone with an old CPD or CPP an immediate NFR (no questions asked)! My original certifications are all hand signed by David Litwack. 😎

              Its time us PB guys had a chance to reinvigorate the product – like the early days of PowerSoft – a grass roots revival!  😉

              Regards … Chris

              (0) 
            1. Chris Pollach Post author

              Hi Roland;

                IF a PB application EXE can run on the cloud (and I have already done this in Amazon) – then I can’t see any reason a DPB Server can not run on a cloud platform either. Given EAServer’s demise and no way for PB NVUO’s to run in NetWeaver – I think bringing DPB back is an awesome idea!

                Oh yeah …and lets make it Windows Service capable as well!   😉

              Regards … Chris

              (0) 
          2. Rich Bianco

            Ditto on WPF. Nobody uses it and the interface (PB’s) is a nightmare because of the backwards compatibility and double properties issue. Junk it. Now if you can generate HTML5 apps that would be sweet.

            (0) 
            1. Mark Libner

              If you and Chris are referring to the unfinished PB.Net interpretation of WPF you might be right. If they’d ignore the bashing and finish it you might be wrong.

              But if you’re referring to WPF as a desktop UI layer I would strongly disagree.

              IMHO…

              HTML5/Javascript is fugly. Join the Javascript library of the month club.

              XAML/C# is elegant and organized.

              A developer with WPF skills can easily transition or share code with web and mobile using MVVM, WCF, XAMARIN etc.

              We all know what will happen to PB if Appeon doesn’t buy it.

              (0) 
              1. Chris Pollach Post author

                Hi Mark;

                FYI: Not more than 5 years ago many Canadian Government departments were building WPF based applications. In 2014 and now this year, I have not heard of one WPF based project. None of my .Net consulting friends are using WPF either. While as you point out its a nicely laid out architecture – the adoption rate seems to be dropping off exponentially in my area.

                  To me, the direction is Web & Mobile. None of my Cdn Gov clients care about C/S any more – and haven’t for 10+ years. I told Sybase that over, over, and over again but the management was OTL.

                I have my fingers crossed that SAP will just give PB to some entity that can return the product to its innovative days of PowerSoft.  😉

                Regards … Chris

                (0) 
                1. Mark Libner

                  In 2014 and now this year, I have not heard of one WPF based project.

                  I can think of a several reasons: they all got written, the Canadian government ran out of money, you have selective hearing, they adopted Winforms as cutting edge technology. 🙂

                  None of my .Net consulting friends are using WPF either.

                  I can think of several reasons: their only client was the Canadian government, their your age and retired…to the US, they leveraged most of the back end code from the WPF projects and seamlessly slapped web and mobile front ends on them, they decided WPF looked too modern and longed for that Windows 95 look. 🙂

                  We write LOB applications. That means desktop, not web and mobile. If the Canadian government runs its business on web and mobile that’s great but its not how we do it. When and if the need for web and mobile come up we will be ready and our apps will be ready because 5 of the 6 layers are in the back end. The UI is just one layer. That’s a lot of code to leverage. And it’s all testable!

                  My apologies to all as I’ve veered off topic. There should be a free version of PB available immediately that works with a SQL Anywhere db of a very limited size. How’s that!

                  (0) 
                  1. Chris Pollach Post author

                    Hi Mark;

                      No .. the Cdn Government’s direction is totally Web … Winform is out. Its Web mandate is set by the Treasury Board of Canada – which directs IT development across the federal government. Even COTS (Computer Off The Shelf) systems that are bought from outside vendors must also be web. The main reasons are: giving a consistent access to applications for government workers; allow the general public access to information through a web browser interface; provide a zero deployment foot print; support cloud computing, etc.

                      There are now some Mobile application trials as well. These are waffling though between HTML vs native built applications at the moment. Each one having its own merits of course. We will have to see how these pilot projects fare before drawing any conclusions in that realm yet.  😉

                      As far as LOB is concerned .. if it works for you great – but, good luck trying to sell it to new Canadian Federal or Provincial government customers. While you might get the odd one interested, getting it approved and funded if they have to vet this purchase through Treasury Board and PWGSC procurement (who look for systems having TB compliance) will be a really tough sell.

                    PS: Over 60% of the Cdn government development is J2EE not .Net. So SOA, PAAS, etc are more important than a WPF GUI. The key there is web services – which I work at more and more in these layers (that you mentioned) which also exists in Cdn government systems big time.  😎

                    … Free version of PB available immediately

                    => AMEN to that my friend!!!!  😉

                    Cheers …. Chris

                    (0) 
                    1. Bruce Armstrong

                      As far as LOB is concerned .. if it works for you great – but, good luck trying to sell it to new Canadian Federal or Provincial government customers. While you might get the odd one interested, getting it approved and funded if they have to vet this purchase through Treasury Board and PWGSC procurement (who look for systems having TB compliance) will be a really tough sell.

                      LOB means Line-of-Business.   It’s what the majority of PowerBuilder apps are, and likely the vast majority of apps that the Canadian Federal or Provincial government customers are creating. Unless they’re gone into the game industry on the side.

                      (0) 
                      1. Chris Pollach Post author

                        Thanks Bruce;

                        I guess I need to refer to these as WEB based LOB vs WPF based LOB. The Cdn model is also heavily influenced by Open Source software vs single vendor technologies like MS.

                          They are both in the “Political Game” industry … does that count?  LOL

                        Regards … Chris

                        (0) 
        2. Rich Bianco

          I think the chances of a PB resurrection are fair if Microsoft can’t learn to stay focused on one thing for more than two years. I know of a lot of H-U-G-E legacy PB apps that aren’t going anywhere.

          The chances of a collapsed world economy are probably higher though with our American leaders, and Hillary is elected to put the final stake in the coffin, assuming we make it through 2015 but I’m an optimist. I almost didn’t type this because I was taught to not talk about politics, then I had an “aha” moment and realized that maybe I was taught that for a reason and being PC may be the reason we are here. If I offended you, let’s talk about it.

          (0) 
    1. Rich Bianco

      I’ve been evangelizing PB privately and for five years on a popular blog. Not that I’m more special than any of you but I asked for a developer license (SAP & Sybase) neither company took the bait, I’m pretty sure Sybase didn’t even answer my request and I even made a pretty good sales pitch showing several hundred site referrals a month while SAP would rather pay $1.60 per click for an adsense referral than encourage the use of their product, and encourage the continued writing of content about their product.

      </ end rant >

      (0) 
      1. Armeen Mazda

        I’m really surprised Sybase didn’t provide you with an NFR copy of PB when ISUG members can get it. This makes zero sense to me.  I believe SAP wants to give PB a future and I’m hopeful things will change for the better.

        (0) 
    1. Chris Pollach Post author

      Hi NNP;

      => With limited demand, cutting the price will further reduce revenue.

      There will be NO demand if SAP keeps going on its current path. Repricing & re-branding (I think) is the only way out of this dilemma

      1) You can’t sell new PB licenses because the price is way too high

      2) You can’t sell PB upgrades because the price is way too high

      3) Keeping the SAP “status quo” is a death wish IMHO

      => Who will pay for these enhancements?

      1) Repricing & re-branding to sell new licenses & upgrades!  

      2) Stop gouging the PB community and reaping ridiculous profits.   😉

      Regards … Chris

      (0) 
      1. Andreas Mykonios

        Yes Chris…

        All what you said seems to be wonderful. But I don’t see anyone interested to do that investment (except maybe Appeon). Even for Appeon I don’t believe they would share your opinions about pricing…

        And there is another question… Certification programs do not exist… So I guess there is not a lot of people who could teach anyone to get certified… So the whole idea about certification seems to me impossible at that point… And even if this was possible to be organized, what would be the cost? I’m not negative to the whole idea, but I believe that to achieve all what you say we need lot of time and someone to make a big investment… I don’t see who is interested to do that… Maybe Appeon? Even SAP could do all that effort (as for them this would be a small budget)… But of course they seem not “interested”… Mey is approaching… Sooner or later we have to get some answers.

        Andreas.

        (0) 
        1. Chris Pollach Post author

             Interestingly enough, I was the person who wrote the original CPD-A exam for PowerSoft. In fact, I developed the certification program originally for the Canadian Government. The Public Works department was using it to weed out undesirable consultants when Grace Yeong at PowerSoft looked at what I built. PowerSoft then approached the Canadian Government to buy the certification exam (which of course they did). I came along with the deal as the technical adviser (where I met Grace). Dave Litwack – the President of PowerSoft – was actually my old boss at Cullinet DBMS in Boston, so Dave & I brokered the deal with the Federal Government for the rights to the exam in exchange for some free PowerBuilder product & services.  😉

            Later on I consulted with Grace Yeong at PS to help build the CPD-P certification level. So I suppose I could do that again … LOL. Yakov Werde and I are previous CSI’s – Certified Sybase Instructors – on PowerBuilder. So educationally speaking, the ability (talent) to recreate educational material on PB or even for Appeon is out there.  😉

             Stay tuned for Senior SAP VP Dirk Boessmann’s presenation at the 2015 PowerBuilder Conference on May 8, 2015 for more PB news. FYI: Moving Forward with SAP PowerBuilderFriday May 8, 2015 | NCPBUG

          (0) 
      2. Rich Bianco

        I agree partially. I think the price can be justified but the lack of free developer copies reduces the sales channel big time. Developers are the ones that tell managers which software they like and which they do not. Many like C# because they can play with it in their spare time without a stupid Sysam lock-down system – which was the start of PB’s slow dying process. I’m tired of paying $200-300 bucks for a copy of PB that expires at one year on the day. Forget it.

        (0) 
        1. Chris Pollach Post author

          Hi Rich;

          1) Yes, ISUG-Tech’s new pricing structure forcing everyone to a Gold level at $299 just to get an NFR is rediculous and another example of greedy price gouging IMHO. The old $99 Green membership level was more than adequate … but again ISUG seems to have lost touch with the PB Community (and maybe reality on this one <bg>).

          2) A free NFR copy to all consultants and students would be paramount in my plan.

          3) You are 100+% correct on the way PB developers & Consultants can sell PB. Its that kind of thing that made PB in the first place and how PowerSoft empowered these people to lobby their IT folks into trying PB in the first place!   😉

          Regards … Chris

          (0) 
          1. Bruce Armstrong

            1) Yes, ISUG-Tech’s new pricing structure forcing everyone to a Gold level at $299 just to get an NFR is rediculous and another example of greedy price gouging IMHO. The old $99 Green membership level was more than adequate … but again ISUG seems to have lost touch with the PB Community (and maybe reality on this one <bg>).

            Of the current 14 filled positions on the ISUG Board of Directors, half of them are held by PowerBuilder users.  Specifically the current ISUG President ( Bryan Enochs ), VP of Membership (Eric Van Patten ), EMEA Director ( Ludwn Feiten ), North American Director ( Jeff Gibson ), Social Media Director  Marcell von Wendland ), Director-at-Large ( Dave Fish ) and Content Director ( myself ) are all PowerBuilder users.  Also given the amount that a number of us are involved in PowerBuilder related activities, it doesn’t seem that we’ve lost touch with that community or with reality.

            (0) 
            1. Chris Pollach Post author

              Hi Bruce;

                Thank you for the insight into the current ISUG-Tech structure. While you present some interesting historical aspects to the BOD – except for Dave Fish – I have never seen/heard these people: a) Present a PB session at TechWave or an ISUG Event; b) Do a Webinar on PB; c) write an article for the ISUG Tech Journal; d) write an article for PBDJ (before it died); e) engage PB Community on the Sybase News Group or SCN; f) Attend a PB User Group meeting within the last 10 years; etc.

                Now while Dave Fish is the former PB Evangelist for Sybase, his role at SAP was different. Even now that he is an independent consultant, he is focused on other products. He even just gave a session at the recent ISUG-Tech event on using another product for development. Even though drawing parallelisms between it and PB – I am not sure how this helps the PB Community. So all-in-all, I stand by my statement.

                In your case though … Bravo! You have been doing PB Sessions at recent UG meetings, ISUG event in Atlanta and I see you are on the billing for the Charlotte NC event as well. Now that is what I call engaging the PB Community .. well done my friend!

                Your recent sessions have been focused around consuming .NET assemblies in PB Classic and your inventive McGiverism approach to this solution is quite admirable. It certainly highlights though the real need to PB Classic to have an easy & intuitive .NET InterOp without using the P.I.A. OLE approach that you have outlined. However, when your up against the IT Managers “do it or else” mandate … anything will do.  ;-(

                So in summary, I stand by my original statement on ISUG’s current relationship with the PB Community. As a fellow evangelist, I urge you to keep engaging the PB Community but be cognizant of telling people the whole truth (be it good or bad), not lead then down a dead end, give them techniques that are sustainable, exercise restraint on recommending features that are not proven, say what you mean about any PB feature set and not what the software vendor or product manager wants you to say about it. These are the things that will really standout in the PB Community when they evaluate how helpful your messages were over the long run.

                In the mean time, keep up the great work and …. how about you joining the ISUG-Tech BOD and showing them how PB Community engagement is done?  😉

              BTW: “Have you hugged your DataWindow today”?   😆

              Cheers  … Chris

              (0) 
              1. Bruce Armstrong

                 

                Thank you for the insight into the current ISUG-Tech structure. While you present some interesting historical aspects to the BOD – except for Dave Fish – I have never seen/heard these people: a) Present a PB session at TechWave or an ISUG Event; b) Do a Webinar on PB; c) write an article for the ISUG Tech Journal; d) write an article for PBDJ (before it died); e) engage PB Community on the Sybase News Group or SCN; f) Attend a PB User Group meeting within the last 10 years; etc.

                Brian has written for PBDJ, Jeff Gibson has written for ISUG-TECH and presented at the ISUG-TECH conferences.  Marcelle von Wendland has written for ISUG-TECH and has presented at TechWave.  Last but not least, Ludwin is the president of what I believe is the largest PowerBuilder user group in Europe, has written for PBDJ, and participates here on SCN. He’s also one of the people responsible for establishing our contact with the SAP people in Germany such as Dirk Bosseman who are responsible for PowerBuilder.  It would appear that you are unfamiliar with their contributions, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t contributing.

                (0) 
                1. Chris Pollach Post author

                  Hi Bruce;

                     I was talking about the 2014 ISUG BOD not the 2015 BOD’s. Its really nice to see Jeff & Luwin on the 2015 roster. I hope that these guys will definitely make a difference over the remainder of their 2015 term as the PB Community really needs everyone to help rejuvenate PowerBuilder.

                     I did look back through my ISUG Tech Journals over the last 5 years and could not find article references that you mentioned. I guess the 2014 BOD people you mentioned have not been active recently.

                     As far as ISUG engaging a User Group – I was not talking about people like myself who ran User Groups (or like Ludwin still does) … but the ISUG BOD actually supporting, sponsoring, providing speakers, showing up to actual meetings, etc. Of course this year, Ludwin can now do that for himself as a BOD member & president … but what about other PB User groups like Matt Balant’s for example?

                    Hopefully, this years BOD will get more involved in SCN as well. I do see the odd posting from Jeff or Ludwin. Hopefully some day soon, they will show up on the leaders roster like you do.    😉

                  Regards .. Chris

                  (0) 
    2. Armeen Mazda

      I agree with you no new power.  What’s the point of lowering the price such that that there is no money to left to fund  improvements to the product?  The PB community is already on stable versions of PB that can continue working without another purchase.  I’d rather spend $3K on a copy of PB that rocks than spend $1K on a copy of PB that is another repeat of PB 12.6.  But as Rich said I think there needs to be a program in place to foster evangelism and promotion of PB from the loyal developers.

      (0) 
      1. Paul Murray

        I love you, Armeen (and your products).

        But I completely disagree with you.

        $3,000.00 for a copy of PB is just nuts.

        If there were free versions and Enterprise versions at $1,500.00 to $2,000.00 then millions of people could be using the product and adopting it instead of just us old dogs.

        If you want something to be taken up by the masses, you need it to be very cheap and adopted by millions.

        Paul

        (0) 
        1. Chris Pollach Post author

          Hi Paul;

            Correction … old => “mature”.   😉

          What do you think about bringing back the Desktop & Professional versions and adding an Express (free) version as well to the roster along with Enterprise?

          Regards … Chris

          (0) 
          1. Paul Murray

            Thanks Chris, but ‘Old’ was the correct word.  🙂

            Anything that will help to get PB into the hands of millions for free or cheap is important.

            I have looked over the code for Visual Studio and do not relish the idea of ever having to learn it.

            Best,

            Paul

            (0) 
            1. Paul Murray

              By the way. I can think of several times where I screwed myself by using PB for various projects or lost business because I said I was going to use PB.  I am WAY more cautious about using PB now.  And if it was not for Appeon I would abandon it all together.

              (0) 
        2. Armeen Mazda

          Hi Paul, Appreciate the love!  As I’ve mentioned I think there should be some type of free version or program to get the software into the hands of more people.  But a company that decides to invest into PB as a platform is not going to sway their decision because the price is $2K vs. $3K.  In fact, tools like Xamarin have done really well and cost $2-4K/year for Enterprise that is actually much more expensive than PB over a few years time.  So IMHO it really comes down to have a compelling product for this day and age and having a good developer community.  We should focus on how to make PB compelling rather than reduce the price by $1K.

          (0) 
  3. Rich Bianco

    I talked my manager into taking a look at PB today. He looked a little shocked when I told him the price. It is an exceptional tool but the price is limiting. The lack of developer copy is severely limiting pretty much cutting off the developer-sales channel which is bigger than SAP probably realizes. Had I not mentioned PB to my manger he wouldn’t have looked at it and I was hesitant as I’ve never felt the love from Sybase or SAP.

    (0) 
    1. Chris Pollach Post author

      Hi Rich;

        OK .. If I get some control over PB … I’m going to Empower people like you with a low cost or even free copy of PB. We need more people on the (as you say) developer-sales-channel getting the PB word out to the IT masses!   😉

      Regards … Chris

      (0) 
  4. Richard Keller

    All Developer Copies of Powerbuilder for Free.   Only charge for versions that compile to executable.   You solve two problems.

    1. Lower Piracy.  I’m sure that they can come up with way to lock the compiler to the machine.  Use the Mac Address or some other combination of identifiers that stamp the PBL’s/Source Code with a secret code to prevent only one copy from compiling and the rest development licenses.   If 5 computers have touched it you require a compiler with 5 Client Access Licenses.

    2.  Developers who want to learn,update, or read write and test to the hearts content for free.  You want to compile and make money off PB you have to pony up the $$$.

    Richard

    (0) 
  5. Krishna Mohan Gullapuram

    I have been working with PB since 2006 and it is close to 9 years now. I still love the way it eases out your work and you come up with an application in no time

    I support the idea that there should be free developer editions. If SAP really wants to promote PB, then it should try to get a LITE version, something which you can’t use to compile and deploy code, but just RUN, TEST, and LEARN. This would attract a bunch of C/S developers who crave for a IDE which offers speed, reusability, and a ton of other features

    I have one question though: I have been looking for quite a while to certify in PowerBuilder, and am located in India. Does SAP offer a certification for PB?

    Regards… Krish

    (0) 
    1. Chris Pollach Post author

      Hi Krishina;

        As we now know … SAP is now in the midst of handing the PB technology over to Appeon. I would strongly suggest that you voice your suggestions & concerns over to Appeon’s CEO Armeen Mazada ASAP using http://www.Appeon.com/Future

      Regards … Chris

      (0) 
  6. Da Sternberg

    I have been using PB since 1997 and have given up on mastering another development product. Prior software mastered since 1980 includes COBOL, MODEL204, and FOXPro as my growth path to the greener PB pastures. Once upon a time, over the course of almost two years, I tried to write a one window .net application using MS VS to replace a PB WPF application.  Management and an experienced .net person let me flounder. Today the one window PB WPF application lives on and I will not waste any more of my life with anything else. Oh and the other 3 people that attended a week long MS VS training with me did nothing with the product after returning to the office.  BTW, I mentioned this not because I think PB WPF .net should live on, but to show what a waste of resources that keeps happening trying to deal with replacing such productive software.  Why people insist on trying to turn an apple into an orange and vice versa is beyond me.

    Further, so many people need or want a job, get real.  What’s wrong with the old business strategy of hiring people who want a job, train them, provide them with a growth path, and
    build your support staff?  If you need applications that delivers core business functionality on the inside only, then there is no better way than PB.  Just evaluate the ~20 PB applications with each having 100s of function points helping people run the business.  Then think of replacing the applications, database(s), and supporting them with only
    2 development staff.  LOL, people are worried about 1 or $3,000.

    Don’t forget the technology advances, such as Citrix and VM, that allow so much to be done with applications consisting of exe and dlls instead of crying about how great it is to run a Web application from anywhere in the world.  BTW, how many web
    applications do you have to try in how many browsers or play with how many
    browser settings before they will function?  BTW, how many places do I need to perform my general ledger accounting process, billing, or other highly protected internal process?  Give me PB classic, let me build exe and dlls, and then deploy to an environment that allows me to run against HANA.  I’ll build you so many applications that perform so many business functions while somebody else is still coding one Web application.  Get
    the platform so people can reach it from anywhere in the world and we can all
    scream for ice cream.

    I need to go now and finish deploying a PB application for testing.  Another application that lives on after wasted resources trying to rewrite in Java or whatever.  PB has lived for ~20 some years and I see no reason why it can’t and shouldn’t be a viable product for another 20 years.  As long as somebody doesn’t lose focus of the core advantages, doesn’t try to make a Swiss army knife out of it, or turn it into a pumpkin.

    Otherwise, somebody start a business plan, replace one reasonable size application that is performing well, figure out the cost and time, and estimate how much and long it will take to do the other 19.  Once I see the plan hopefully I can retire.

    (0) 

Leave a Reply