I believe the more documentation is open to the public the better. Look at the large Microsoft site with free training on SQL Server 2005. Free downloads and tons of help, examples and product documentation.
If IBM is really committed to marketing MV solutions then it is in everyone's best interest that MV become public. They do not teach MV technology in college. Many MV shops find it difficult to hire programmers and many MV programmers feel that skill is not very marketable. After twelve years of MV programming, I find a lot of MV programmers I worked with have changed to other skill sets or are changing skills to VB.NET and/or Java so that they will have jobs in the future. Sincerely, Diane Boyd MV Programmer -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 3:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: U2 Users Digest V1 #1394 U2 Users Digest Monday, November 13 2006 Volume 01 : Number 1394 In this issue: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers Re: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 17:11:13 -0000 From: "Brian Leach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers Exactly ! A good knowledge flow opens people's eyes and creates opportunities. And it's not just an end user issue. Without knowledge flow where will the next generation of vars come from? Who will bring new blood and investment? How will we encourage developers into our market ? How much more difficult are we making it to sell mv based solutions to end users by obscuring the full potential of what they are buying ? How many times have mv-invested companies resorted to other solutions because they didn't unow that their existing systems had the capabilities to deliver what they needed all along? It is in all our interests - users, vars, consultants - to raise and keep fresh the profile of this technology. That begins by making sure people out there can understand what it can achieve for them. I remember an speech years ago by a mv vendor proudly saying that 80% of his business was repeat business. He saw that as customer care. I saw it as lack of outreach. Who was right? Brian - -----Original Message----- From: "Ken Wallis"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 11/11/06 23:42:25 To: "u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org"<u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org> Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers Chuck Stevenson wrote: > Interestingly, guys like me don't care, because vars like Strategy > Seven are nice to us. It would be end users with curmudgeonly vars > that would need a user group to make this end run. I still think > someone who cares should submit a U2UG enhancement request and others > should second it. Otherwise IBM only hears about you through the very > var who is blocking you. And the odd thing is that it is VARs like S7 who make money from their generic skills in the database platforms rather than from working in specific vertical markets with their applications. You would have thought S7 were the sort of VAR who might consider themselves in danger of losing revenue by working to get this information out. Clearly, however, they must realise that access to information helps users understand what is possible and want to make use of the technology. Cheers, Ken ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:57:06 +1300 From: "phil walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers Conspiracy Theory: Maybe IBM does not want a future MV environment, maybe they hope everyone will go to DB2...if so, then I hope it works. I think more likely they would go to Microsoft, where information is readily available. ;-).... - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Leach Sent: Monday, 13 November 2006 6:45 a.m. To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers Exactly ! A good knowledge flow opens people's eyes and creates opportunities. And it's not just an end user issue. Without knowledge flow where will the next generation of vars come from? Who will bring new blood and investment? How will we encourage developers into our market ? How much more difficult are we making it to sell mv based solutions to end users by obscuring the full potential of what they are buying ? How many times have mv-invested companies resorted to other solutions because they didn't unow that their existing systems had the capabilities to deliver what they needed all along? It is in all our interests - users, vars, consultants - to raise and keep fresh the profile of this technology. That begins by making sure people out there can understand what it can achieve for them. I remember an speech years ago by a mv vendor proudly saying that 80% of his business was repeat business. He saw that as customer care. I saw it as lack of outreach. Who was right? Brian - -----Original Message----- From: "Ken Wallis"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 11/11/06 23:42:25 To: "u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org"<u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org> Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers Chuck Stevenson wrote: > Interestingly, guys like me don't care, because vars like Strategy > Seven are nice to us. It would be end users with curmudgeonly vars > that would need a user group to make this end run. I still think > someone who cares should submit a U2UG enhancement request and others > should second it. Otherwise IBM only hears about you through the very > var who is blocking you. And the odd thing is that it is VARs like S7 who make money from their generic skills in the database platforms rather than from working in specific vertical markets with their applications. You would have thought S7 were the sort of VAR who might consider themselves in danger of losing revenue by working to get this information out. Clearly, however, they must realise that access to information helps users understand what is possible and want to make use of the technology. Cheers, Ken ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 15:26:56 -0800 From: Ken Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers As an IBM reseller of U2 products, I can assure you that your VAR or reseller can request that their users get access to the IBM documentation. You just need to ask the vendor who charges you for U2 support. Ken At 05:47 PM 11/10/2006, you wrote: >Stevenson, Charles wrote: >>First, my own var, Strategy Seven, was aggressive in getting me access >>to the knowledgebase. >> >I think that says it all. >Surely, it's up to each VAR to determine if any and/or all of their >users should or should not have access to the knowledgebase, for >whatever reason, be it revenue stream, be it implementation quirks, >code, ....whatever.... > >Can IBM maintain a register of end-user within VAR to permit access? >T'wouldn't be too difficult, Ida thought..... >This isn't really a function of a user group, is it? It's solely >an individual user/VAR/IBM function, and I firmly believe the VAR >has some rights to preclude access if the VAR deems it prudent..... > >-- >Regards, > >Bruce Nichol >Talon Computer Services >ALBURY NSW 2640 >Australia > >http://www.taloncs.com.au > >Tel: +61 (0)411149636 Fax: +61 (0)260232119 > >If it ain't broke, fix it till it is! >------- >u2-users mailing list >u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 18:56:45 -0800 From: "Bill Haskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers Brian: "I remember an speech years ago by an MV vendor proudly saying that 80% of his business was repeat business. He saw that as customer care. I saw it as lack of outreach. Who was right?" For a few years, he; for the rest, you! Remember, in the long run we're all dead, so, it's no surprise some take the short-term view. :-) Bill ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:16:11 -0500 From: "Debster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers I don't know how 'aggressive' strategy 7 needed to be in oder to secure access to the knowledge base.. I took one phone call to them after I was booted from IBM because S7 held the license, and I was on in no time flat If a VAR is going to make excuses and deny access, its time to review when the contract renewal date is It's not the Knowledge Base that pisses me off -- it the hoops between Developer Works AND Knowledge Base. There should be a smooth flow between the two, 1 access to both or tiered based on rights. Also the fact that IBM can't get the website from losing your login, and forcing re-entry of login info is annoying. Forget it if you hold licenses for multiple systems -- that REALLY confuses them....(especially if one was direct) Opening access reduces support calls, and I don't know any support staff that truly welcomes being inundated with calls when you can RTFM or review online references to get an answer. Except if the VAR wants to boost call response numbers by barring access, then it's a bogus water mark. Debra A. Fedchin ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ H: 732.698.0499 C: 732.233.3088 www.infinite-systems.net "Anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm". - -Syrus Publilius - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Stevenson, Charles Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 1:28 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers I don't see why anyone, IBM or var, needs to guard that door. Just open it up to the general public. I don't think there is anything --- or very little --- in that knowledgebase that needs to be so carefully guarded that only people with the secret handshake get to see it. Let anyone who wants to see it, see it. It's not as if IBM is going to be inundated by hits due to teenagers posting links on MySpace. Actually, there is one reason to keep people out: Knowledge is Power. Apparently some vars want to keep their users dependent on them. Bruce, you list some reasons vars might have. Apparently some of those are legitimate enough that they have persuaded IBM to keep the secrets. But if enough users who vehemently disagree and want access, IBM has to rethink who they want to please. A user group is precisely where that rabble should rouse. I often hear complaints that one can't find knowledgeable practitioners of U2. That is a reason to avoid or abandon the platform. Interestingly, guys like me don't care, because vars like Strategy Seven are nice to us. It would be end users with curmudgeonly vars that would need a user group to make this end run. I still thnk someone who cares should submit a U2UG enhancement request and others should second it. Otherwise IBM only hears about you through the very var who is blocking you. cds > From: Bruce Nichol > > Stevenson, Charles wrote: > > First, my own var, Strategy Seven, was aggressive in getting me access > > to the knowledgebase. > > > I think that says it all. > > Surely, it's up to each VAR to determine if any and/or all of > their users should or should not have access to the > knowledgebase, for whatever reason, be it revenue stream, be > it implementation quirks, code, ....whatever.... > > Can IBM maintain a register of end-user within VAR to permit access? > T'wouldn't be too difficult, Ida thought..... > > This isn't really a function of a user group, is it? It's > solely an > individual user/VAR/IBM function, and I firmly believe the > VAR has some > rights to preclude access if the VAR deems it prudent..... > > -- > Regards, > > Bruce Nichol > Talon Computer Services > ALBURY NSW 2640 > Australia - ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 01:33:56 -0500 From: "Stevenson, Charles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [U2] Access to IBM knowledgebase for in-house developers > I don't know how 'aggressive' strategy 7 needed to be in order > to secure access to the knowledge base.. I meant that they were aggressive in getting the access mechanism for us in the first place. If I remember correctly, a couple years ago or so there was a nice announcement in the email newsletter from IBM that said we could get knowledgebase access via our vars. Before that announcement, I had complained thru my support vendor, S7, that I wanted but didn't have said access. They went to bat for me and I sort of beta tested it before that newsletter announcement. Maybe there were others besides me, I don't know. I think it was before U2Ug. That's the "aggressiveness" I referred to. At least, that's how I remember it. > I took one phone call to them after I was booted from IBM > because S7 held the license, and I was on in no time flat Yes, now it's easy, except for pages that get moved around so bookmarks fail, & login confusion that Deb already noted. But that's a separate issue. (I wonder if the other IBM user groups are complaining about that.) cds ------------------------------ End of U2 Users Digest V1 #1394 ******************************* ------------ u2-users-digest mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
