Ok, I want a good stable product. I suspose I just want a good stable product more offten then 5 years apart. At the enterprise level we are being forced to squeeze every last ounce of productivity out of the tools we own today. If tools are driving
down development cost or delivering lots of end user satisfaction then there is a problem, period. From my point of view Analysis Services looked like a sure thing bet for the future. The reasonably quick iterations beteen 7.0 and 2000 provided lots of good
enhancements. At this point my disapointment comes from these facts:
1) We are still struggling to bring OLAP to the masses. However the design experience in SQL 2000 was nice back in 2000 but 5 years?!
2) The integration between Analysis services and Excel in the XP timeframe got lots better. Then 2003 shipped and we got nothing....
3) SQL reporting services was a great add-on. Don't get me wrong I was in the launch video, but we still need an end user power query tool. (Don't even get me started about MS Query in Excel).
4) Partitioning... yikes.
I think at this point I would have been happy with the 2000 product with some productivity enhancements. A more incremental approach where functionalty improved ever 2 years would have bee welcomed. (Yet, again don't get me started about the SA value we have
received from SQL 2000. I agree reporting services came out but how many people run the web gui on SQL server?? without extra licenses.)
I, on the other hand, really struggle to keep with the testing and costs of licesing a new version of SQL Server, so I've benefited from the respite of not having a new version of SQL thrown at me for five years. But then, we're small by comparsion, five servers
supporting maybe 500 applications for 3500 users. And we don't use Analytics at all. We are in the same boat about having to squeeze the services well past the bleeding point, though. The stability and predictability of SQL2000 has been a godsend in that sense.
I also suppose that as far as product releases go its very easy to go from nothing to something, but its very hard to go from good to really good or to great.
One thing that I'm hopeful about systems like Channel9 for is that folks on the Office Team will see your comments about the non-improvement of Excel as an Analytics client and take that to heart. I'd be hard pressed to know what more you could really need
in Excel, maybe you'd care to share that list?
There's also a significant problem for many of us in giving the users a more powerful query tool. We can generally express the need for growth in services on a per-project basis, but making such systems really function well as both OLAP and OLTP systems is
a much harder sell because management doesn't "get it" about the value of data mining. Rather than giving them a great query tool -- which would make my job easier in the long run -- I'm all to frequently forced into a "oh, we'll just write some reports for
them." No evolution of SQL Server is going to solve that problem in and of itself.
Finally, we seldom partition: we just don't need it nor could we deal well with the complexity and latency it would introduce.
Lastly, nobody that I know of and helped with RS runs the RS Services on the meta data hosting database. We also seem to be able to putting them on a dedicated server. Somehow.
I think we represent the traditional market for SQL Server, and you, Shawn, represent the Market where MS wants to be. Its gotta be tough pleasing both of us.