Channel 9 Forums - Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? http://mschnlnine.vo.llnwd.net/d1/Dev/App_Themes/C9/images/feedimage.png Channel 9 Forums - Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums Channel 9 keeps you up to date with the latest news and behind the scenes info from Microsoft that developers love to keep up with. From LINQ to SilverLight – Watch videos and hear about all the cool technologies coming and the people behind them. http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums en Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:28:39 GMT Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:28:39 GMT Rev9 31 -31 -1 Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? Ok, with the recent news Yukon is going to be delayed (again!) until 2005 I really have to ask what the SQL server team is thinking delaying this product this long?  I have seen demos and quite frankly it looks amazing, but, it is now due early 2005.  Some of the things in SQL 2000 which looked really good when it was released are starting to look quite frankly pretty clunky by todays standards.  These things include the Analysis services UI, Partitioning Support and DTS.  Quite frankly some of the other vedors are starting to get it right and the ease of use of some the new tools just blows the SQL 2000 design environment out of the water. 

Microsoft, get this thing out the door.  I don't even care about CLR functionality at this point, I just want a more usable product for delivering business intelligence functionality.  You can give me the CLR bits later.  Management is starting to ask if SQL was the right decsion? 

http://weblogs.asp.net/sjsmith/archive/2004/04/13/112845.aspx

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/2483#2483 Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:13:02 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/2483#2483 sjsmith 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/sjsmith/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? I would rather wait for the database to be written the right way and be more sucure, then rush it out and have tons of problems after its released.

Scenario 1: The released a buggy application that needs a bunch of patches, its unsecure, etc...

Scenario 2: They are taking to long to release it. Its delayed again.

Either way, soemone is going to be upset by the outcome, just have to look at it from a MS point of view i guess.

Personally, i'll wait, but if i didnt want to wait, i would just go with another database.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/88343b8be5a4436b96e99dea01145d0c#88343b8be5a4436b96e99dea01145d0c Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:35:38 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/88343b8be5a4436b96e99dea01145d0c#88343b8be5a4436b96e99dea01145d0c darklotus 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/darklotus/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? I can see both points.

5 years is along time between versions of SQL Server. Oracle 9i & 10g are pulling ahead.

I would rather see a mature product brought to market that has gone through ALPHA, BETA & Dog-food, than early just to stay ahead. I think Microsoft have made that mistake before.

It is so important that Yukon is an Enterprise class database if Microsoft want to use it as the flag-ship that takes them into the heart of the Enterprise.

I think we are going to have to be patient. Rome wasn't built in a day. But there is a down-side, Microsoft better not decide to faze out SQL 2000 in a hurry after Yukon is launched.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/ea3ce21478984cefbe699dea01145d41#ea3ce21478984cefbe699dea01145d41 Wed, 14 Apr 2004 16:27:57 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/ea3ce21478984cefbe699dea01145d41#ea3ce21478984cefbe699dea01145d41 David Oliver 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/Sabot/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? Don't get me wrong we can get the job done with SQL 2000 in most areas. I think what I am looking for is the big bump in productivity other tools have come out with in the same time period. The one feature I really want is an expanded Analysis Services experience. It was a very nice version 2.0 release when it came out in SQL 2000. Now it is 2004 and we have not realized any productivity gain in this area for 4 years! This is becoming unacceptable, I could not imagine other vendors not shipping a new version of product in the BI space for 5 years when it is all said and done with Yukon. I expect more from Micrsoft, they have been the big productivity booster in the past, now we are looking at buying other tools in the near term to do more with less people. The reality of 2004.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/99f78a49e15f42799ce79dea01145daa#99f78a49e15f42799ce79dea01145daa Wed, 14 Apr 2004 16:37:28 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/99f78a49e15f42799ce79dea01145daa#99f78a49e15f42799ce79dea01145daa sjsmith 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/sjsmith/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
sjsmith wrote:

Ok, with the recent news Yukon is going to be delayed (again!) until 2005 I really have to ask what the SQL server team is thinking delaying this product this long?  I have seen demos and quite frankly it looks amazing, but, it is now due early 2005.  Some of the things in SQL 2000 which looked really good when it was released are starting to look quite frankly pretty clunky by todays standards.  These things include the Analysis services UI, Partitioning Support and DTS.  Quite frankly some of the other vedors are starting to get it right and the ease of use of some the new tools just blows the SQL 2000 design environment out of the water. 

Microsoft, get this thing out the door.  I don't even care about CLR functionality at this point, I just want a more usable product for delivering business intelligence functionality.  You can give me the CLR bits later.  Management is starting to ask if SQL was the right decsion? 

http://weblogs.asp.net/sjsmith/archive/2004/04/13/112845.aspx



That is exactly what they did with Windows ME and look at how it turned out.

They are not going to do that again and pretty much everyone prefers that it be done before it is released.

Not to mention, a finshed version of Yukon is going to be more effective at competing than an unfinshed version that is later completed as a service pack.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/c58f0ca201aa47cf8ac99dea01145d7b#c58f0ca201aa47cf8ac99dea01145d7b Wed, 14 Apr 2004 16:38:53 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/c58f0ca201aa47cf8ac99dea01145d7b#c58f0ca201aa47cf8ac99dea01145d7b Shining Arcanine 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/Shining Arcanine/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? The DTS experience could be much better also. I have only seen a few bits of what this will look like in Yukon and I must say I can't wait for it to get here.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/9ef853d1f8974952bf759dea01145dd6#9ef853d1f8974952bf759dea01145dd6 Wed, 14 Apr 2004 17:15:46 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/9ef853d1f8974952bf759dea01145dd6#9ef853d1f8974952bf759dea01145dd6 bitmask 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/bitmask/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? Take this for what its worth... it's late and I've been reading "moon in a dewdrop" again.

It really amazes me how many people just don't get "it" about the CLR in Yukon. What if I were to tell you that us mere mortals having access to the CLR is a side effect of Microsoft using the CLR to realize many of the functional features like the UDM, XML as type and DTS. It's certainly the bedrock of Reporting Services. Yet, so many would have Microsoft burn away the CLR functionality just because Oracle 10g could potentially be more promising or because other tools have newer UIs.

They never had to give us access to the CLR in Yukon, you know. We would never have had to know it existed. The product might still be delayed anyway.

Yes, they are making the right decision, but it seems either you get it or don't. I suppose its the fault of folks like me who are trying to evanglize Yukon the way that others are Whidbey for not communicating the message clearly enough.

As to managers asking if SQL Server is the right thing or not, I'd want to know why they went to SQL Server in the first place. If it only was for the BI platform, well, that's an interesting choice. True, it hasn't evolved as quickly as even I would like, but also true, IMHO, that few other db-vendor offered packages have either. At least, not by direct development. After all, its easy to buy an analytics company with one hand and join with the DOJ in beating up MS with the other for being a "monopoly."

This isn't a sprint, this is a marathon. There's plenty of room in the market for scale up and scale out. One size doesn't seldom fits all.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/1ec7a390113b44feb0639dea01145e0c#1ec7a390113b44feb0639dea01145e0c Thu, 15 Apr 2004 04:35:43 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/1ec7a390113b44feb0639dea01145e0c#1ec7a390113b44feb0639dea01145e0c ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? UDM UI and DTS UI are written in Managed code but not the plumbing (although they can be used from managed code) and the XML Datatype is not written in Managed Code.

Almost all of the UI for the product is written in Managed Code in addition.

-Euan

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/66c473e9e660403899ed9dea01145e39#66c473e9e660403899ed9dea01145e39 Thu, 15 Apr 2004 05:05:21 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/66c473e9e660403899ed9dea01145e39#66c473e9e660403899ed9dea01145e39 EuanG 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/EuanG/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? 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.)

Shawn

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/41077d7cdeb94447b1ff9dea01145e6d#41077d7cdeb94447b1ff9dea01145e6d Thu, 15 Apr 2004 05:52:32 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/41077d7cdeb94447b1ff9dea01145e6d#41077d7cdeb94447b1ff9dea01145e6d sjsmith 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/sjsmith/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
EuanG wrote:
...the XML Datatype is not written in Managed Code.


I know you know that, but I could swear that I read that such was the case elsewhere in the PDC bits.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/522eb48fb381470dac089dea01145ea5#522eb48fb381470dac089dea01145ea5 Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:51:40 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/522eb48fb381470dac089dea01145ea5#522eb48fb381470dac089dea01145ea5 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
sjsmith wrote:
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.)

Shawn


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.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/fad649a28cef4fc4b6859dea01145ee8#fad649a28cef4fc4b6859dea01145ee8 Thu, 15 Apr 2004 12:20:25 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/fad649a28cef4fc4b6859dea01145ee8#fad649a28cef4fc4b6859dea01145ee8 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
sjsmith wrote:
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.)

Shawn


Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

If Microsoft was to ship Yukon now, there might be a devastating bug in it (for anyone that has used MySQL 4.0.x, remember the table corruption bug that was in it until 4.0.15?) that would completely ruin it while if they shipped Yukon when it is ready, they would probably find and fix it.

That is just an example of what could happen if it shipped early.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/a43e6508fc9b41a7ada49dea01145f1a#a43e6508fc9b41a7ada49dea01145f1a Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:33:25 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/a43e6508fc9b41a7ada49dea01145f1a#a43e6508fc9b41a7ada49dea01145f1a Shining Arcanine 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/Shining Arcanine/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
Shining Arcanine wrote:

Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

If Microsoft was to ship Yukon now, there might be a devastating bug in it (for anyone that has used MySQL 4.0.x, remember the table corruption bug that was in it until 4.0.15?) that would completely ruin it while if they shipped Yukon when it is ready, they would probably find and fix it.

That is just an example of what could happen if it shipped early.


Too true. I think we all care too much about our data to put them in what would essentially be a beta product masquerading as a full release version. If Microsoft releases a poor version of IE the worst thing that could happen is we couldn't access the internet, we wouldn't lose anything but we wouldn't gain either. The worst thing that could happen if an SQL server screws up is all the data is corrupted or wiped out, could cost thousands could even end the company!

There is nothing wrong with SQL2k, it seems to do what it was designed to well. So until the new version is released they should stick with SQL2k and if that doesn't suit their needs they should look at alternate vendors (which there are lots).

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/82ba7e8cb5604b16bcbe9dea01145f49#82ba7e8cb5604b16bcbe9dea01145f49 Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:53:25 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/82ba7e8cb5604b16bcbe9dea01145f49#82ba7e8cb5604b16bcbe9dea01145f49 Manip 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/Manip/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? Are you maybe getting confused with Date, Time and UTCDateTime? They are written in .Net Languages.

-Euan

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/051b428d220a424aa7d79dea01145f76#051b428d220a424aa7d79dea01145f76 Fri, 16 Apr 2004 04:11:46 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/051b428d220a424aa7d79dea01145f76#051b428d220a424aa7d79dea01145f76 EuanG 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/EuanG/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
EuanG wrote:

Are you maybe getting confused with Date, Time and UTCDateTime? They are written in .Net Languages.

-Euan



Nope, I knew those too. Dr... Err... Michael Rys chimmed in with this, too: http://sqljunkies.com/WebLog/mrys/archive/2004/04/15/2075.aspx

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/0b1f7f4959034be1a5f99dea01145fa6#0b1f7f4959034be1a5f99dea01145fa6 Fri, 16 Apr 2004 11:34:01 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/0b1f7f4959034be1a5f99dea01145fa6#0b1f7f4959034be1a5f99dea01145fa6 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
Manip wrote:
There is nothing wrong with SQL2k, it seems to do what it was designed to well. So until the new version is released they should stick with SQL2k and if that doesn't suit their needs they should look at alternate vendors (which there are lots).


Wow, two things I agree with Manip about!

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/37214600a8b145d48da29dea01145fd3#37214600a8b145d48da29dea01145fd3 Fri, 16 Apr 2004 11:35:28 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/37214600a8b145d48da29dea01145fd3#37214600a8b145d48da29dea01145fd3 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? So are you saying it was the Tim Anderson interview that led you to believe it was managed?

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/35b4a18690d94c6c90529dea0114600c#35b4a18690d94c6c90529dea0114600c Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:01:23 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/35b4a18690d94c6c90529dea0114600c#35b4a18690d94c6c90529dea0114600c EuanG 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/EuanG/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
EuanG wrote:
So are you saying it was the Tim Anderson interview that led you to believe it was managed?


No, Euan, I've not read/seen the interview yet. That is was an .NET-Defined type is a (mis)perception I've had since last August or so. Michael's comments helped me understand more about it, as it did yours.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/6d22fac97d524b4086b09dea0114603a#6d22fac97d524b4086b09dea0114603a Fri, 16 Apr 2004 20:26:57 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/6d22fac97d524b4086b09dea0114603a#6d22fac97d524b4086b09dea0114603a ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? Excellent, glad we could clear it up.

-Euan

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/ebef2144e129490f9e6a9dea01146065#ebef2144e129490f9e6a9dea01146065 Fri, 16 Apr 2004 23:33:31 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/ebef2144e129490f9e6a9dea01146065#ebef2144e129490f9e6a9dea01146065 EuanG 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/EuanG/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? try mysql it free it has ASP support because mysql has the ODBC support
http://www.mysql.com

but PHP as direct access to the database server because it does not use ODBC at all. I could say that PHP is faster then ASP maybe PHP is better then ASP.
http://www.php.net

Mysql and PHP are both open source. In other word Mysql and PHP are in fast progress. SQL Server 2000 is losing ground.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/520d34855a544c6291349dea01146094#520d34855a544c6291349dea01146094 Sat, 17 Apr 2004 00:54:01 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/520d34855a544c6291349dea01146094#520d34855a544c6291349dea01146094 Jackco 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/Jackco/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
Jackco wrote:
try mysql it free it has ASP support because mysql has the ODBC support
http://www.mysql.com

but PHP as direct access to the database server because it does not use ODBC at all. I could say that PHP is faster then ASP maybe PHP is better then ASP.
http://www.php.net

Mysql and PHP are both open source. In other word Mysql and PHP are in fast progress. SQL Server 2000 is losing ground.


Don't you mean ASP.NET? Not ASP. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe ASP is a scripting language that is 3-5 times slower than PHP while ASP.NET is a compiled framework that  performance wise, blows PHP away, even with Zend Optimizer.

SQL Server 2000 is not losing ground to MySQL because while it is an enterprise class product, MySQL is not.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/8fba296a4efb441882239dea011460c2#8fba296a4efb441882239dea011460c2 Sat, 17 Apr 2004 02:36:59 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/8fba296a4efb441882239dea011460c2#8fba296a4efb441882239dea011460c2 Shining Arcanine 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/Shining Arcanine/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
Shining Arcanine wrote:
Don't you mean ASP.NET? Not ASP. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe ASP is a scripting language that is 3-5 times slower than PHP while ASP.NET is a compiled framework that  performance wise, blows PHP away, even with Zend Optimizer.

SQL Server 2000 is not losing ground to MySQL because while it is an enterprise class product, MySQL is not.


Rage on Pokebrother!

As somebody that uses both, MySQL is certainly fine for some things, like, when I need a database on Debian or I'm implementing some application that was pre-written for it. It's certainly easier to me to use than some of the other DBs available in that scope since it is significantly like SQL Server.

Where MySQL fell apart for me in maintaining anything more than a single-application system. At the time I did a lot with it (I waS working C# Data Access then) that was fine.

When it came to using it for more than one application or having to do a lot of administration work against it, the tools then weren't up to snuff compared to SQL Server.

I'm sure than since MySQL AB incorporated and found a profit motivation to make MySQL more competitive that the product has continued to improve. Its easy for them to agile in that sense. But then, I find it ironic that in order to get their paper on how MySQL can reduce your TCO by 90%, you have to register on their site.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/b32e95b970f547999aba9dea011460f4#b32e95b970f547999aba9dea011460f4 Sat, 17 Apr 2004 04:05:55 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/b32e95b970f547999aba9dea011460f4#b32e95b970f547999aba9dea011460f4 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
Shining Arcanine wrote:
Jackco wrote:try mysql it free it has ASP support because mysql has the ODBC support
http://www.mysql.com

but PHP as direct access to the database server because it does not use ODBC at all. I could say that PHP is faster then ASP maybe PHP is better then ASP.
http://www.php.net

Mysql and PHP are both open source. In other word Mysql and PHP are in fast progress. SQL Server 2000 is losing ground.


Don't you mean ASP.NET? Not ASP. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe ASP is a scripting language that is 3-5 times slower than PHP while ASP.NET is a compiled framework that  performance wise, blows PHP away, even with Zend Optimizer.

SQL Server 2000 is not losing ground to MySQL because while it is an enterprise class product, MySQL is not.


The thing I like about Open Source is that there is more people working on MySQL and PHP worldwide then MsSQL and ASP.NET. Microsoft will never be open as Open Source.  compare IE with Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/a9b1910228b24ec9858c9dea01146130#a9b1910228b24ec9858c9dea01146130 Sat, 17 Apr 2004 22:24:18 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/a9b1910228b24ec9858c9dea01146130#a9b1910228b24ec9858c9dea01146130 Jackco 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/Jackco/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? I think the fact that Windows has a monopoly seems to help a lot.

Open Source can only get better and is often designed to work cross-platform. Unfortunately no one has the funds to really compete on the same level as Microsoft which has immense profits and a huge bank account with no debt.

IBM and Novell are the only ones that can really compete (perhaps Sun and Redhat stand a small chance)

I wonder what Redhat would do if they had $50bn in the bank? Would they make Linux even better and user friendly, or make their products proprietary and closed source?

For cheap web hosting with moderate traffic LAMP is the best solution (Linux Apache, MySQL, PHP)

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/4caec70919d94ca7b9419dea0114617d#4caec70919d94ca7b9419dea0114617d Sat, 17 Apr 2004 22:34:41 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/4caec70919d94ca7b9419dea0114617d#4caec70919d94ca7b9419dea0114617d sbc 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/sbc/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
sbc wrote:
I think the fact that Windows has a monopoly seems to help a lot.

Open Source can only get better and is often designed to work cross-platform. Unfortunately no one has the funds to really compete on the same level as Microsoft which has immense profits and a huge bank account with no debt.

IBM and Novell are the only ones that can really compete (perhaps Sun and Redhat stand a small chance)

I wonder what Redhat would do if they had $50bn in the bank? Would they make Linux even better and user friendly, or make their products proprietary and closed source?

For cheap web hosting with moderate traffic LAMP is the best solution (Linux Apache, MySQL, PHP)


I don't believe that being a Monopoly (if it were) helps Microsoft develop better products in the least. In fact, I think it hurts them. When everybody is running your stuff, you can't be as agile was you want. If the "delay" of Whidbey and Yukon have demonstrated anything, its that. A&B/Miller has kind of proven that just because you're virtual monopoly, that doesn't mean you have best product. Smiley

As for what any company would do, they would do what companies are legally obligated to do: maximize shareholder return. As alturistic as supporting open source sounds, in the end, they have no choice, they have to sell something. With Linux, you're paying for the "value they add to it." With Microsoft, you're paying for the "value they add to you."

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/d1c1262e80e94445bfb29dea011461b3#d1c1262e80e94445bfb29dea011461b3 Sun, 18 Apr 2004 14:46:09 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/d1c1262e80e94445bfb29dea011461b3#d1c1262e80e94445bfb29dea011461b3 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? Lets hope Whidbey and Yukon are much higher quality and bug-free than previous versions. Pity Visual Studio is so expensive (unless you get massive discounts if you are non-profit or government [as you are spending taxes for the tools])

Also it would be good if SourceSafe was anywhere near as good as CVS (or Subversion). Why not have CVS/Subversion support in Visual Studio? Probably not as these are widely used by the Open Source community, which Microsoft seems to be against (at least at the OS / Office Suite level - Linux / Open Office)

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/946302bea5f44a498d9d9dea011461e1#946302bea5f44a498d9d9dea011461e1 Sun, 18 Apr 2004 14:56:43 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/946302bea5f44a498d9d9dea011461e1#946302bea5f44a498d9d9dea011461e1 sbc 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/sbc/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
sbc wrote:
Lets hope Whidbey and Yukon are much higher quality and bug-free than previous versions. Pity Visual Studio is so expensive (unless you get massive discounts if you are non-profit or government [as you are spending taxes for the tools])

Also it would be good if SourceSafe was anywhere near as good as CVS (or Subversion). Why not have CVS/Subversion support in Visual Studio? Probably not as these are widely used by the Open Source community, which Microsoft seems to be against (at least at the OS / Office Suite level - Linux / Open Office)


Sorry, I couldn't stop laughing.

Let's compare: You can get pro, full edition, retail: $500. Now go figure out how much it would cost you to equip yourself with WebSphere. "So expensive" must be relative to what, NotePad?

I can use CVS all day long with Visual Studio if I want too. I doesn't strike me that Microsoft doesn't want us not to use CVS or SubVersion. In fact, it seems rather popular. Yes, they provide Visual SourceSafe. Yes, its a minimalist soultion. Fine, don't use it.

Maybe I listen to the collective too much and just can't see things from the other point of view about OpenOffice. But I don't see Microsoft as being against Open Source as much as they are for their own products. But then, in our capitalist Economy, that exactly what they should be.

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/fd3f6747d2e5452b825e9dea01146213#fd3f6747d2e5452b825e9dea01146213 Sun, 18 Apr 2004 15:30:46 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/fd3f6747d2e5452b825e9dea01146213#fd3f6747d2e5452b825e9dea01146213 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? Does CVS work from within Visual Studio, integrated as well like SourceSafe?

Unfortunately being in the UK, US products have not gone done in price (I think I have read somewhere PC's can cost $500 less if you buy them in the US rather than the UK. Visual Studio.NET Pro costs £855 ($1,537) in the UK, $989 in the US - why the huge difference (apart from exchange rates)?

The poor US$ helps exports from the US but harms imports to the US from Europe and Japan. US products cost us the same in the UK, but make the US companies more. It's cheaper to fly to America, buy Visual Studio (or a PC), and then fly back.

Is there a Visual Studio just for Web Development (no Win Forms, but supporting both C# and VB.NET)?

Dreamweaver MX costs $370 in the US, £350 ($629) in the UK. So it is a lot cheaper for Web Development.

The closest .NET IDE (only?) to Visual Studio is SharpDevelop. Doesn't have ASP.NET support and so is probably nowhere near Visual Studio in terms of features. Pretty good though considering it is Open Source - also compiles for Mono as well as Microsoft.NET.

It is expensive if you are non-profit, which is why some companies are using languages like Python (which has a basic free IDE). What about the Eclipse IDE as well? Komodo only costs $295. Not for VB.NET or C# but works for Python/Perl/Tcl/PHP/XSLT (Open Source languages). It shows that IDE's can be a lot cheaper.

What profit is made on Visual Studio, is it 80% like it is for Windows/Office? IMHO anything that makes that much profit is overcharged for (I suppose you could argue for value for money).

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/f4befd409eb44353babe9dea01146246#f4befd409eb44353babe9dea01146246 Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:12:34 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/f4befd409eb44353babe9dea01146246#f4befd409eb44353babe9dea01146246 sbc 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/sbc/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? [quote user="ktegels" ]
   When everybody is running your stuff, you can't be as agile was you want.

This is a particularly interesting balancing act in windows:

In addition to new customers, a large segment of the market for longhorn are people who are running existing versions of our os, so we are essentially competing with ourselves in making longhorn compelling enough that these people want to upgrade. 
We must inovate significantly between versions, and offer a really compelling value add to customers for this to happen.

   However we also have to try to maintain backwards compatibilty with every application written for previous versions of the platform, including the ones that made use of undocumented stuff, or non-specified behaviour ( if they break, microsoft is blamed, whatever the reason... ).

It's an interesting line to walk...

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/2f56501be6774fa9a5969dea01146275#2f56501be6774fa9a5969dea01146275 Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:36:58 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/2f56501be6774fa9a5969dea01146275#2f56501be6774fa9a5969dea01146275 spod 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/spod/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon?
sbc wrote:
Does CVS work from within Visual Studio, integrated as well like SourceSafe?

Unfortunately being in the UK, US products have not gone done in price (I think I have read somewhere PC's can cost $500 less if you buy them in the US rather than the UK. Visual Studio.NET Pro costs £855 ($1,537) in the UK, $989 in the US - why the huge difference (apart from exchange rates)?

The poor US$ helps exports from the US but harms imports to the US from Europe and Japan. US products cost us the same in the UK, but make the US companies more. It's cheaper to fly to America, buy Visual Studio (or a PC), and then fly back.

Is there a Visual Studio just for Web Development (no Win Forms, but supporting both C# and VB.NET)?

Dreamweaver MX costs $370 in the US, £350 ($629) in the UK. So it is a lot cheaper for Web Development.

The closest .NET IDE (only?) to Visual Studio is SharpDevelop. Doesn't have ASP.NET support and so is probably nowhere near Visual Studio in terms of features. Pretty good though considering it is Open Source - also compiles for Mono as well as Microsoft.NET.

It is expensive if you are non-profit, which is why some companies are using languages like Python (which has a basic free IDE). What about the Eclipse IDE as well? Komodo only costs $295. Not for VB.NET or C# but works for Python/Perl/Tcl/PHP/XSLT (Open Source languages). It shows that IDE's can be a lot cheaper.

What profit is made on Visual Studio, is it 80% like it is for Windows/Office? IMHO anything that makes that much profit is overcharged for (I suppose you could argue for value for money).


I don't care if its integrated or not. I'm not that lazy. IJW like its supposed to. <grin />

I can't speak about the UK markets other than suggest maybe it would be cheaper to buy from the US, pay the conversion and have it shipped.

Yes, there is, its free and its called WebMatrix.

I use Komodo alot because VS.NET doesn't debug XSLT very well. I still frequently find myself using TextPad for VB.NET. Having said that, I'm happy to pay the $1500 per year to renew my MSDN subscription, since it makes me very, very product to have all of the tools.



]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/e9a807599372467881929dea011462b4#e9a807599372467881929dea011462b4 Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:41:32 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/e9a807599372467881929dea011462b4#e9a807599372467881929dea011462b4 ktegels 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/ktegels/Discussions/RSS Coffeehouse - SQL Server 2000 is losing ground -- Where the H**L is Yukon? WebMatrix tends to reformat your code (as does Visual Studio), does not allow you to specify tabs for indenting or allow you to customise the syntax highlighting. Also WebMatrix does not like Dreamweaver code and has not been updated in a while.

I like to keep control of my code formatting and style and not have an editor reformat it (unless I specify it to)

It also can not compile code (which is why I use SharpDevelop).

So there is no Visual Studio.NET Web Developer Edition then? Pity, I am sure people would use it and it should cost less that the Pro edition (due to lack of Winforms support)

]]> http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/d8581d9f7a954f53ab019dea011462ee#d8581d9f7a954f53ab019dea011462ee Sun, 18 Apr 2004 16:57:10 GMT http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/2483-SQL-Server-2000-is-losing-ground-Where-the-HL-is-Yukon/d8581d9f7a954f53ab019dea011462ee#d8581d9f7a954f53ab019dea011462ee sbc 31 http://channel9.msdn.com/Niners/sbc/Discussions/RSS