Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

313.0. "3rd Party 4Gl, Rdb, CDD/Plus?" by BRDWLK::FARLOW (Steve Farlow @STO - DTN 445-7212) Thu Mar 09 1989 18:10

I have been involved in an extensive campaign to sell Rdb to a customer that
wanted to purchase Oracle.  They initially felt that Oracle's 4GL tools fit
their development needs and the database was satisfactory.  They also
thought that Rdb was inferior.

After several presentations and meetings, we were able to convince the
customer that Rdb as a database engine is superior to Oracle and will become
more so in the future.  Also, we sold them on the software independence of
putting their data in an Rdb database and then selecting from a wide range
of development tools including 10 or so third-party 4GLs.

After many demnonstrations, they have decided that Cullinet's Enterprise 4GL
with Rdb will best meet their needs.  We also sold them on the benefits of
using CDD/Plus.  Now they want to understand what they will need to do to
use CDD/Plus in this environment.  Cullinet will be integrated with CDD/Plus
in the future but not right now.

I am not sure what to recommend to the customer.  This is a common
situation.  In selling Rdb as a "software independent" solution (which is
very effective against Oracle), we have to know how CDD/Plus fits in
especially in the meantime while 3rd party 4GLs are working to integrate
their products with CDD/Plus.

From what I understand, the 3rd-party 4GL Dictionary is used to
automatically set up the Rdb database.  So, to integrate CDD/Plus,
an INTEGRATE command needs to be issued after the database is
defined/changed.  Then, to use the some active CDD/Plus features,
ENTER statements for the records and fields must be entered through CDO.

From the customer's perspective, the extra work of learning CDD/Plus,
and keeping CDD/Plus in synch with the database is not worth the benefit of
knowing where fields are used. This is especially true since the 4GL
programs are tied to the database through the 3rd party dictionary
so program usage of fields cannot be tracked.  The benefits do not
justify the extra work.  And quite honestly, there is not yet a very large
pool of specialists with CDD/Plus expertise to help the customers.

I am tempted to suggest that the customer not use CDD/Plus until the 4GL is
integrated with it.  I understand the importance of the data dictionary, but
at the same time we must be realistic with our customers so they are
satisfied in the future after the sale.

The easy answer is sell only Rdb with RALLY and CDD/Plus.  But, in selling
software independence of Rdb, I can't say that RALLY is the only 4GL to
consider because it is integrated with CDD/Plus.

Please tell me there is something that I am missing.  But be realistic.  In
this situation, this customer is in a unit of a large corporation that has
selected Oracle as its corporate standard database.  It is critical that the
customer have a good experience with Rdb.  If so, we have a good chance of
unseating Oracle throughout the corporation.  If not, we will be locked out
in the future.

This note is also posted in the DATA_DICTIONARY conference.
    
Steve Farlow @STO
MDVAX1::FARLOWS

    I have some concerns about recommending Cullinet's Enterprise 4GL
    with Rdb/VMS today - please see various notes on the topic towards
    the end of the RALLY_COMPETITION notes file. Please feel free to
    mail me if you require more detail.
    
    I get the impression though that the customer has already selected
    the product. If this is the case, then you should consider the
    following: 
    
    - The dictionary included within the Enterprise software does not
    well support Rdb/VMS, e.g. cannot simply change a datatype within
    the dictionary.
    
    - Cullinet does not seem to have well designed or implemented their
    interface to Rdb/VMS; there are no guarantees that they would do
    any more effective a job with CDD/Plus
    
    - Cullinet is currently at some level of risk of takeover due to
    present financial difficulties; the impact of takeover is likely
    to significantly slow such developments as a CDD/PLUS interface,
    whilst the new organisation gets itself in shape. Hence a reasonable
    time frame for such an interface cannot be relied upon

    You should also be aware that Cullinet will be announcing an Oracle
    interface in the near future, so you could be leaving the door wide
    open at the customer site for continued development of applications
    based on Oracle databases ?

    Best regards, Alison.