To make is easier to adopt OpenEdge and for anyone to get started with OpenEdge, we provided the "OpenEdge Evaluation Kit".
The evaluation kit contains a fully functional but 60 day time limited version of OpenEdge Architect, the OpenEdge Tour and, within the Tour, a mini tutorial called Try-it.
Since we first announced it at Exchange and later at other events and email you might have received, the OpenEdge Evaluation Kit is one of the top downloads on PSDN Online. Every month we get hundreds new registrations, not just from developers that use a previous version of Progress but it is also attracting new developers to our community.
Recently we also added an Evaluation Kit for Sonic 7 Workbench so that OpenEdge developers can now also try the Sonic MQ and ESB adapters within OpenEdge. It also contains a document that describes how to configure OpenEdge and Sonic.
That is what we have today, check it out on http://www.psdn.com/library/entry.jspa?entryID=1131
We are already planning to update the evaluation kits for the upcoming 10.1B and we are considering more evaluations of other PSC and/or OpenEdge Products.
So, the timing is exactly right to provide feedback on the registration process, your experience with the Tour, the Try-it, etc. What do you like and what could we improve?
I am also interested in how you used the evaluation kits. Did you just tried a "load & go", did you try the new capabilities and if so which ones, did you do some prototyping, did you try Sonic with OE, etc?
Any feedback is appreciated!
60 days is ridiculously short. I downloaded the eval kit right after it was announced. I installed it and tried a few obvious things out and then things got busy. I haven't been back to it since. I suspect that this isn't a very unusual thing.
Perhaps it is possible to download it as many times as I want. I don't know, I've been afraid to ask. I'm also afraid to try to uninstall it -- I've got this irrational fear that it is going to refuse to let me uninstall it because the license has expired.
Most products in the market have 30 day evaluations, I thought that was too short so we eventually compromised to 60 days. I don't think it is "ridiculously short" though.
The purpose of an "evaluation" is not free product and we're hoping organizations plan to evaluate and after the evaluation period do an upgrade, buy a license or take a PSDN subscription.
On case by case basis, the Account Manager might decide to extend the evaluation period but I do not think unlimited Evaluation downloads is an option. Still, don't be afraid to ask anything and be assured I also watched the other threads on open source, briefcase, etc.
Based on your previous email, I think I understand you still have an evaluation so does that mean you have not upgraded yours yet? Any specific reason?
Note: You should be able to uninstall the evaluation, even if the license is expired/evaluation period ended, if not, let me know and I log a bug.
To me, the "ridiculously short" part has to do with purpose. From the perspective of the consultant or developer who wants to check out and keep current with new features, really any expiration is undesirable. For them, the old (ancient?) test drive concept of having to do a dump and load after 10 server starts worked well because it was essentially a low cost perpetual license, albeit with an annoying "feature". But, I don't think that is the target of the current eval program, whether this standard download or an on request eval license. For this program the purpose is sales. And, by and large, in that context, if 60 days isn't long enough, then one probably isn't "ready" in the way that a salesperson wants a prospect to be ready. They're still kicking tires. When they are ready enough to commit resources to the test, then 60 days is probably enough for most cases. Doesn't help the person working on their own with other "day job" priorities, though.
Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice http://www.cintegrity.com
If that's the case then what's the difference between Test Drive and an Eval license, 30 days ? And I think that making private developers pay is a penny wise pound foolish type arguments.
If the purpose is as you said "for anyone to get started with OpenEdge" maybe someone can walk us through that idea with a 60 days, one time installation ?
Does Progress really expect private developers, enthusiasts and college kids, if we're talking about PUP to pay the same prices as businesses ? how many of your personnal users (developers) buy a developement license, personally I've never met or personally heard of one ? We're not your customers we're your partners. Hopefully, we write good ABL programs, successfully implement and provide support for the applications to run. And yes, we do directly sell Progress products because we're the ones saying we need x licenses, Webspeed or any other setup, we do it all the time.
Keeping the same closed minded approach developers will run into Progress if they happen to run into Progress, by chance, developers and consultants will keep struggling, new technologies will take far longer to catch on no matter how much whitepapers and documentations you put out there. You want us to champion oe10 to our customers or companies but we don't know what it is. And its not something to simply dismiss but it does do alot to antagonize developers that have commited to Progress.
What ever you do, give it time. It takes a while for things to catch on, don't expect a quick return in a few month and if that doesn't happen pull the plug. The same thing with Sonic, give it time. Theres still alot to catch on but people will start using it if the option will still be there.
Message was edited by:
If that's the case then what's the difference between Test Drive and an Eval license
The thing specifically being discussed here is the download which is available without having to make special arrangements. There will always be eval licenses also because someone needs special software to evaluate or they need to test it on something other than Windows.
And I think that making private developers pay is a penny wise pound foolish type arguments.
You can think that ... it is pretty clear by now that you do ... but you don't seem to realize that the purpose of these eval offerings is to make sales. Those consultants and developers working for a behind-the-times shop you keep talking about are generally not people who are meaningful sales prospects. They should be willing to buy their own license, but apparently they aren't. So, that's not this program.
Instead, to get what you want you need to convince PSC to offer perpetual, low cost licenses to individual developers. To convince them of that, you would first need to figure out why it is that this is going to increase sales. The constultants and contractors are working for people who already have Progress ... and so are the night-time students who work for a shop that isn't current. How will it increase PSC sales to give away licenses to them? It will help the individual, but not PSC. And, who qualifies? Do I? I am currently a one person corporation. So are a number of consultants and contractors. Do they fail to qualify just because they are corporations?
FWIW, I have been a partner since 1985, so I don't actually have the problem.
How will it increase PSC sales to give away licenses to them?
Presumably some portion of such licenses would be used by people who bootstrap themselves into becoming a partner with an application to sell.
It is said that more than one substantial partner did just that with the old Test Drive product -- so the notion is not pure fantasy.
One could just as easily ask what harm does it do to provide a perpetual free license to people who won't ever actually pay for one? Software is not a perishable good -- free copies of development licenses cost virtually nothing. If only one in a million results in a modestly sized partner then it was a good investment was it not?
Do they fail to qualify just because they are corporations?
An interesting question.
I've never really understood the logic behind PSDN's Premier subscription qualification. I may be weird in that I would happily pay for it but sadly PSC does not want my money because I'm "just" a lowly consultant. Apparently I'm the competition rather than a valued part of the Progress eco-system (I guess that explains the NDA's too now that I think about it...)
When it comes to downloading this kit with an eye to migration (as suggested by the choosen forum) there are some additional considerations.
Even an internal evaluation can take well over 60 days. Particularly if it is happening under semi-hostile conditions.
I can think of lots of situations where the technical people want to upgrade and are willing to do work to show that it is feasible and beneficial but where they need to do this "under the radar". Such projects often stop and start and take a long time to complete. A standard "eval" from PSC doesn't work for that and neither does a 60 day free download.
I'm pretty sure that the sales force is very aware that these cycles can take a long time -- years even; but that they are well worth it in the long run.
Another part of it is that migration is about a lot more than the pretty front end tools. People get really worried about their database and the server side of things. So a windows-only (or windows-centric) download really isn't sufficient either.
I think, a limited version makes alot of sense but IMO a limited feature version and not a time limited one would work better in this case.
The basic _edit.p editor, compiler, runtime that can only compile and run code for this type of version alot like the Developer Briefcase is well worth fighting for.
And a one agent Webspeed/Appserver if we want people to learn about n-tier applications and a single-user database, please
What ever it is it needs to be a simple, neat and practical one to put together.
It is said that more than one substantial partner did just that with the old Test Drive product
That it may have happened once doesn't necessarily indicate that it is an effective strategy. While two people in a garage do occasionally produce substantial companies, two people in a garage with no funding rarely make it, so it is unlikely that the cost of a development license or two will make or break the prospects of the company. If Progress is the right choice for the development and deployment environment, it is the right choice, not because it might be free. If it was a question of a $100,000 buy-in, I could see it as an obstacle, but at $3600 for OEA, it just isn't a big deal for anyone that is serious.
So, for it to have no cost, this means you are providing no support and no upgrades, right?
So a windows-only (or windows-centric) download really isn't sufficient either.
Which is one of the reasons there are eval licenses for everything. You have to ask for it and present a reasonable case, but I've never had any problem.
For the record, a 4GL development license is only $2240.