We have had some discussions recently with customers, both small and large, about their ability to fully adopt OpenEdge Architect as their development platform, and what challenges, if any, they have had with the OpenEdge Architect.
These customers reported several issues with OpenEdge Architect such as:Â• Developers have had to modify code (specifically pre-processors and quoted-strings across line breaks) imported into OpenEdge Architect before it could be used.
Â• Developers have seen performance issues working with (open, edit, compile) applications with a large number of lines of code, artifacts, tables, or data fields.Â• Developers have had difficulties working with multiple projects within a workspace such as high resource (memory, CPU) utilization, slowness in moving between projects, and each project consuming a database connection.
We are interested if OpenEdge Architect forum members have seen similar issues, and if these issues are creating adoption barriers for you. Please let us know what your experience has been with this poll.
Poll URL: http://www.psdn.com/library/poll.jspa?pollID=10
I might note that you have stated this poll entirely in the negative, i.e., "are there problems with OEA which are preventing you from adopting it?" What this misses is the other side of the coin, i.e., "Do you have a tool which you like better than OEA such that your barrier to moving to OEA is the superiority of this other tool?" There are a number of ways in which ED4W with appropriate extensions is a better editor than OEA. Other than the fact that my current direction gives me an incentive to specifically use OEA, I would be strongly inclined to stick with ED4W, not because of the problems with OEA, but simply because it is a better editor in many ways.
Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice http://www.cintegrity.com
I believe we had quite a bit of discussion of that kind in the "favorite missing editor feature" thread in this forum.
Indeed, and given that the two threads are right next to each other at the moment, it makes for an interesting juxtaposition.
Suffice it to say that, if one wants to increase the adoption of OEA, then one has to:
1) remove obstacles;
2) improve to create parity with other options; and
3) create compelling advantages.
All are needed to induce people to switch.
Thanks for your feedback on this issue. The results posted here are consistent with other feedback we have recieved from users, and we'll incorporate this into our OpenEdge plans.
Poll Results: OE Architect adoption "challenges"? (see description in the thread)
Have not seen these issues - full speed ahead: 3 (60.0%)
Little experience with these issues - minor impact: 0 (0.0%)
Some experience with these issues - will slow Architect adoption: 2 (40.0%)
Often experience these issues - Architect adoption is not possible: 0 (0.0%)
Of course, 5 responses doesn't make for much of a survey...
One might suggest that there are at least four levels of reason for such a low response.
The first level, of course, is simply that people are often not very good at responding to surveys, especially if they are a bit fuzzy about the issues. I would suspect that there was a pretty large percentage of the people who read this particular forum who are a bit fuzzy on the issues you have raised.
The second level is that a poll on a forum about OEA is likely only to be read by people using OEA, so someone who has decided not to use OEA isn't even seeing the poll.
The third level is that a lot of people reading PSDN aren't yet on 10.1, so it is a non-question. They are only reading this forum if they are curious and hoping to get there, but the ones locked into 8.3 or whatever are probably unaware and uninterested in the question.
The fourth level is that the traffic on PSDN is such a small percentage of the overall OpenEdge community.
The second level is that a poll on a forum about OEAis likely only to be read by people using OEA, sosomeone who has decided not to use OEA isn't evenseeing the poll.
The second level is that a poll on a forum about OEA
is likely only to be read by people using OEA, so
someone who has decided not to use OEA isn't even
seeing the poll.
I absolutely agree to this statement!
But since there are a few more people active in this forum (just have a quick look on the names that opened a thread) I would have expected some additional responses.
Not sure if we should take the low participation as a "yes I'm satisfied with OEA" or a "I don't understand the question" or "I'm not interested in sharing my opinion to make things a little better".
It is notoriously hard to get people to respond to surveys of any kind and, unless one is quite rigorous, it is very easy to end up with a biased sample because those who do respond do so for some reason that makes them less than typical of the population that one is trying to survey. When one only gets five responses, the results are statistically meaningless, regardless of how the survey was designed and with all the biases and exclusions which occur in a setup like this it is really meaningless.
But, what to do?
My guess in this case is that a lot of the people who even saw the poll didn't have well defined opinions and/or weren't entirely clear on the question. That translates into an automatic non-response. Add in a bit of can't be bothered and one doesn't get much.
I've posted this under an OEA "first impressions" - the issue I'm having right now is simply configuring colors. A bunch of the characters are defined as being black, but since I want a black background, they can't be seen.
and I can't find any color configuration which corresponds to these chars in order to fix the problem and make them visible again.
My first impression, obtained several times now is:
OMG! What is all this crap churning up my CPU and taking over my screen?
Why can't I just open an existing .p and do something useful right away? Why do I have to even think about "projects" blah, blah, blah...
What was i thinking? This was obviously a mistake -- I'll just uninstall this and go back to good old (micro)Emacs. Call me when it is usable.
I like the idea of OEA. It looks great in demos. It is truly tempting. But I've had the reaction above every time I've tried to use it... all that I want to do is to edit some code and tip-toe into using the neat tools that I keep seeing. But the mountain that I have to climb to do even the simplest things is just ridiculous. No thanks, I don't need it that badly.
You're just sore because there isn't a ChUI version!
I think your expectation is unreasonable. What you want is to be able to start with just another editor and somehow grow from there. But, I don't think you get an integrated tool set that way. Frankly, setup is not that difficult ... it just needs some better documentation and perhaps a setup wizard to prime the pump.
Hey Tom! How long did it take you to get used to emacs? It's always hard to compare the (CHUI) tool you fly blind with a new toolset on a new platform.
Give it a chance!
I'm just reporting my experiences regarding adoption challenges... I've tried it. At least 3 times and found it to be a waste of energy, disk space and computing capacity all three times.
Maybe there needs to be an adoption kit for dinosaurs or some such but what is there now has not, so far, convinced me that this is a useful tool.
Emacs took me about 10 milliseconds to get used to and to use effectively. It took a couple of days to figure out how to migrate all of my EDT macros (the old VAX/VMS editor) but I could use it to do useful stuff right away. I started life with "sos"
When I'm stuck on Windows I prefer Wordpad to the Progress editor or OEA. It doesn't screw up my code and try to "help" me with stuff that I don't want it doing.
Vi is somewhere in the middle between emacs & OEA. It has taken years to get beyond "hunt & peck" with that piece of crap excuse for an editor ("ed" is better). But it is often the only choice (until I can get emacs ported) so I've reluctantly learned to deal with it.
Anyhow... the thread is about 'adoption "challenges"' and these are mine
I was impressed at Exchange this year by all that Architect could do, so we committed to make the switch by year's end. We're on 10.1C and have gotten past some major issues with CPU usage and the editing of large programs.
The only major hurdle at this point is that I can't configure my environment to automatically open the appBuilder for .w code. My co-worker has apparently the same settings (we spent about an hour comparing them one by one) and has no problem, but I can't do it. I've also followed the instructions in the Knowledge Base, etc. So I have to keep switching back and forth, and once I go to appBuilder I tend to stay in it for the rest of the day because I'm more comfortable with it ...
We do miss the outline view (is that the term?) in appBuilder which eliminated the need to see a bunch of pre-processor code and made it easy to tell when you had reached the end of an internal procedure.
Great Valley Technologies