CodeBetter.Com
CodeBetter.Com
RSS 2.0 via Feedburner
           Do you Twitter? Follow us @CodeBetter

Karl Seguin

developer @ Fuel Industries ottawa, ontario

I would quit before working with Rational

Rational, which was bought by IBM awhile ago, sells a range of products aimed  at large-scale enterprise development. Requirement management, bug tracking, source control, modeling, etc. There are two problems with Rational – it’s insanely expensive and insanely bad software. We had 2 full time Rational "administrator, bought 70 hours of Rational consultation every 3 months and put every developer and manager through 2-5 day courses.  Oh ya, we spent a small fortune on licenses (like 6K a pop or something crazy).  You can’t save money by not going on the course either, because "checking out" a file doesn’t actually "check it out" and "checking in a file" doesn’t actual "check it in". You want to "rebase" and "deliver" – which of course you can’t do from VS.NET.

Partial integration is a real pain in the ass, but it’s better than XDE’s (Rational’s modeling tool) broken integration. You see, Rational works via floating licenses. You don’t use a license unless you are actually doing something. In theory, this means you don’t have to buy every developer a license (what are the chances that 100% of your developers are checking out a file at the same time?) Forget the fact that you hold on to a license for 30 minutes, and at 8:00AM or 4:30PM a lot of developers ARE actually trying to do source control operations. So where does XDE fit into this? Well, since XDE is a VS.NET add-on, having VS.NET open – even if you aren’t using XDE – means you’re eating a license. Thanks Mr. Rational, here’s another $20K.
I’m sure there are really big teams out there that need products like Rational. For the rest of us, there are only two good reasons to go the [ir]Rational route:
  1. It’s expensive so it must be good
  2. It’s needed for RUP
Hopefully you know those are both lies. For your sake, your manager better know it too!

When the pricing for VSTS came out, it blew my mind that people were complaining. Obviously the people complaining most have no idea what people are willing to pay for bad software that does this!  VSTS is a steal – end of story.

What else is wrong with Rational?
  • Every time anyone opened the source control client, we’d get an index out of range error. We were told that we had too many baselines in our project. Sorry for doing continuous integration.
  • The UI sits on top of a rational shell with Unix-like commands. Not too bad, but anything remotely advanced and you’ll need to do it in the shell
  • You’ll spend tends of thousands of dollars and still have to use nANT, nUnit and CruiseControl.NET. (I have no problems with those tools, but for that kind of money, I’m expecting a fully integrated end-to-end solution).
  • All the applications are English only (someone please tell me that I’m wrong on this one, I still can’t believe it)
  • Poor to No integration with the IDE
  • Horrible UIs – Create a new Bug and you’ll see about 4 ClearQuest internal items in the new menu – no way to hide them.
  • This might have changed but on the heels of .NET 2.0 Rational still hadn’t committed to continuing their support for VS.NET
  • You will need a ClearCase and ClearQuest administrator



Comments

chris donnan said:

LOL

I am a huge ClearCase/ ClearQuest hater. I just came off of a project where I have to guess that problems with ClearCase cost us REALLY ~15% of a developer's time !! Awful - as you described.

A few years ago I was considering the RUP thing for an organization. We eveluated all the bits and bops and - we thought it was too expensive for an un-intrgrated pile of stuff. You seem to have found the same thing - albeit via a bit more expense and pain.

One thing I found amusing was when we asked Gartner about purchasing an SCM Solution - the one thing they said NOT to consider was ClearCase - that it was a 10 year old code base and it required LOTS of manpower to manage it. Ugh!

Anyhow - Down with Rational!!!

-Chris
# June 19, 2006 9:13 AM

Bjørn Reppen said:

I couldn't agree more... Rational products are on my top 10 list of software that I get a headache from running (for real).
# June 19, 2006 9:36 AM

Arnon Rotem-Gal-Oz said:

I wholeheartedly agree - Rational tools are very cumbersome to use
There are few scenarios where VSTS is a little weak (compared with ClearCase) - but hopefully MS will catch-up by V.next.
And XDE is even worst – it is probably the worst UML editor I've seen - it is a actually a step backwards Rational Rose.
# June 19, 2006 9:59 AM

Sahil Malik said:

At some point, Rational was the only decent choice available at the pricepoint they are. That explains their fan-following to a great extent. There are still a lot of larger shops and managers that believe in RUP, and most project management shops will insist that you learn RUP for that very reason.

For technical reasons or not, you cannot ignore Rational. You may not like them, but you can't ignore them. :)
# June 19, 2006 10:04 AM

Ghassan said:

I agree with Sahil
I am new to Rational, and I know they have problems, but for the benefits that they provide, I believe they have way more advantages, than disadvantages
maybe I don't know a lot of tools in the industry, and maybe there are better tools
What really blows my mind in rational, is the relations between the requirements, the specifications, the development, and the maintenance

I am big fan of it, and honestly, after I get used to it, I don't like to work without it

# June 19, 2006 12:04 PM

Yann Schwartz said:

I beg to differ.
Agreed, Rational **modeling** products are abysmal. RUP is nothing but an elaborate scam to squeeze money out of PHB's via licences and consulting fees (it's called death by a thousand licences) and Rational Rose/XDE is the ultimate testimony that top down modeling via RUP is doomed (I have yet to see a more buggy, resource-hog, stupid, anti ergonomic POS than XDE. It's even worse than Lotus Notes, which says a lot)

But Clearcase is another story altogether. Agreed, it's complex (you need a Clearcase guru to set it up and maintain it), it's not suited for small teams, and now there are many alternatives (Subversion sticks to the mind) but when set up right, it's a joy to use.

First, Clearcase was not written by Rational. Atria used to publish it before being bought by IBM (and unfortunately IBM just sat on the product, not many useful updates to Clearcase in years). So Clearcase has none of the braindead quality standards of Rational.

You point out the poor integration with Visual Studio. It's true. But I think VSS is to blame here. Let's face it, Visual Studio can't interface properly with *any* SCM apart from SourceSafe. And SourceSafe is a joke. If you're not using the VSS straightjacket, many SCM concepts just don't map to VSCCC craziness. And we're better off with the CLI or an integration in Explorer (see TortoiseCVS, TortoiseSVN or - surprise - the very good Explorer integration with Clearcase).

Using a CLI is a bonus. With a slight learning curve (ok, an insanely steep learning curve, but you end up storing sample queries) you can query your source base with a SQL-like precision (like, mmh i'd like to get every .cs files checked out between these dates, that are identical in thse two branches and get the diffs from a third branch). You don't need these kind of things every day, but it sure helps when you do. For the run-of-the-mill stuff, a right click in Explorer on your dynamic view does the trick.

One of the things I've learned to love is the way Clearcase show the files. You define a set of rules (the config-spec) of the files you want to see, based on date, branches, versions, and you get a mapped drive showing the right combination of files. It's a godsend when doing continuous integration/automatic builds. You can work on many branches at the same time, and the branching/merging is a breeze. Since it's a network drive you automatically see any check-in. You can also mount a private view from another dev machine. When more than 60 people are working on a set of projects, this can be really useful. That being said, the network drive thingy can make your VS and your network crawl.

I've worked in several environments where Clearcase had been bought and set up by PHB's, and the teams ended up working like they had no SCM. But when properly set up, by (very) knowledgeable people, Clearcase rules. (if you don't mind dropping a lot of money, yes)

One of the huge cons of Clearcase is its inability to work properly multi-site. For my own small to medium scale projects, I'd go for Subversion any day.
# June 19, 2006 12:08 PM

jeremiah johnson said:

I quite like Rational stuff.  I work at a place that has something liek 5000 developers and our site-license means we don't feel the price pinch that other places would feel.

I've never tried to integrate them with .net or visual studio though.  we're a WebSphere shop.
# June 19, 2006 1:47 PM

Rory Primrose said:

I have felt the Rational pain before. I'm glad that I only had to suffer for around nine months with it. The only thing that I did like which it had over VSS and TFS was the ignore whitespace changes in the code comparer.
# June 19, 2006 6:38 PM

willem said:

I got someting worthwhile from Rational...

At a previous company I worked for, we would get "loyalty points" for working overtime, attending training etc... So I had to attend Clearcase/ClearQuest (can't remember which is which) training.

Nasty product. Nuff said.

I never got to use Rational in production, but the loyalty points were enough to trade in for a small microwave.

Thank-you Rational!
# June 22, 2006 6:19 AM

Karl Seguin [MVP] said:

Even though Rational's suite of products is my second most hated piece of sotfware ever, it did introduce...
# July 19, 2006 12:20 PM

Josh said:

I thought you all might find this YouTube video funny that is based on SCM tools.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmOYEe9JqAI

Enjoy.

Josh

# February 9, 2007 3:58 PM

Alan said:

We call it ClearWallet.  It's out lived its design and IBM knows it!  They are losing market share, and accounts left and right to more progessive SCM products or simplier models. UCM is a poorly developed. Base ClearCase is tolerable. I've seen it deployed with inexperience help and causes a castrophe.  However, I've deployed it in companies that are satisfied. But no matter how you slice this - it's still ugly!

-ClearCase/ClearQuest Administrator

# July 17, 2007 6:39 PM

Leave a Comment

(required)  
(optional)
(required)  

Enter the numbers above:
Add
Check out Devlicio.us!