Reporting Services version ​restriction​s...

Ok, I've got a customer who wants to put his databases on his laptop (XP Pro) during a trip. I say no problem, install SQL Server Personal Edition. However, he wants to generate reports using Reporting Services. No dice. Reporting Services will not run under Personal Edition.

Is this just a case of MS being lazy about testing? He's paid for the Standard Edition license, but he needs to get reports built on his laptop. What's the point of the restriction?

And no, Developer Edition isn't an option. This is an end user of the DB, so he's not writing apps.

Not entirely sure how this works out with the EULA, but if this is just temporary, perhaps the April CTP of SQL Server could be used? I believe that it is higher up in the SKU chain than the Personal Edition.

That's a decent short-term fix, but this isn't the first time my customers have complained.

barogers wrote:

Ok, I've got a customer who wants to put his databases on his laptop (XP Pro) during a trip. I say no problem, install SQL Server Personal Edition. However, he wants to generate reports using Reporting Services. No dice. Reporting Services will not run under Personal Edition.

Is this just a case of MS being lazy about testing? He's paid for the Standard Edition license, but he needs to get reports built on his laptop. What's the point of the restriction?

And no, Developer Edition isn't an option. This is an end user of the DB, so he's not writing apps.

the long term fix is to use .net 2.0 version of reporting services bits... in a smart client app.

why?

I can tell you more later but I am short on time right now.... but I'll tell you this now:

RS was first set to be part of SQL 2005 and .Net 2.0
but folks told MS "Gives reporting now" and they did.

in VS 2005 B2 you have parts of RS that can run on a client ala Active Reports or CR -- as a client only w/o a web server.
this is the way to use a RS report on a client w/o the web server and other stuff.

so build an off-line data store sql or xml or what ever.
use VS B2 withthe "Go Live"
and build a report view / print app with your reports.

give the app an option to connect to the main db or the local data.

Bing!  all better.

figuerres wrote:

the long term fix is to use .net 2.0 version of reporting services bits... in a smart client app.

This all sounds really cool. We're considering moving to .NET 2.0, but we currently can't accept the "second half of the year" delivery date. It's too risky for our next project, which has to be fully verified by early March.

It's worth investigation, though. Thanks!

barogers wrote:

figuerres wrote: the long term fix is to use .net 2.0 version of reporting services bits... in a smart client app.

This all sounds really cool. We're considering moving to .NET 2.0, but we currently can't accept the "second half of the year" delivery date. It's too risky for our next project, which has to be fully verified by early March.

It's worth investigation, though. Thanks!

I hear ya!

BTW: I wanted to say more before but had a time problem. I used RS from beta and have been kinda busy with other stuff of late.
I wrote a print lib that a few folks got the code for including a MS tech as basis for some sample code for them to use.

Beta 2 does have a "Go Live" perhaps you can get an "OK" to build just a report exe for now??
so all it does is print and view reports on a laptop??
the data and the UI for the rest of the app could be .net 1.1 and so the "risk" of the beta would be very slight??

Just an idea on how to start the move with one key part ...


another option:  the rdl format is XML
perhaps a .net 1.x local hosting of ASPX as a local report server.
you would need to write some code to read the rdl and transofrm it to html with the data but then some reports could run localy on the MSDE version of sql and not carry the whole report server??

kinda "ReportServer Lite"  I am thinking you can re-use a lot of the report server classes with a few hacks.... but could be a lot of work.
depends...

barogers wrote:

This all sounds really cool. We're considering moving to .NET 2.0, but we currently can't accept the "second half of the year" delivery date. It's too risky for our next project, which has to be fully verified by early March.

You should move NOW!
You don't have to wait for the final product, beta2 comes with a go-live license, which essentially means that the product is ready to and SHOULD be used in a production environment.

dotnetjunkie wrote:

barogers wrote: This all sounds really cool. We're considering moving to .NET 2.0, but we currently can't accept the "second half of the year" delivery date. It's too risky for our next project, which has to be fully verified by early March.

You should move NOW!
You don't have to wait for the final product, beta2 comes with a go-live license, which essentially means that the product is ready to and SHOULD be used in a production environment.

have you read the fine print of that EULA?
most corp. IT folks will have to be very careful with it.

for example:

3.       Internal Production Use.  Subject to the terms of this Supplemental License, Recipient may, at its sole discretion and risk, use the Pre-Release Software in a live production environment solely for internal purposes, provided that Recipient takes adequate precautionary measures to back up and protect Recipient’s data.

4.1        Recipient may not distribute any portion of the Pre-Release Software, including without limitation the Targets, to any third parties.

 8.       No Support.  Microsoft is not obligated to provide maintenance, technical support, Updates or other support to Recipient or Recipient’s users of the Applications.  Recipient is solely responsible for updating its users, if needed, with versions of Applications that operate satisfactorily with subsequent releases (including the final commercial release) of the Pre-Release Software.

10.       PRERELEASE/TIME SENSITIVE CODE.  THE PRE-RELEASE SOFTWARE CONTAINS TIME SENSITIVE AND PRERELEASE CODE THAT IS NOT AT THE LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE AND COMPATIBILITY OF A FINAL, GENERALLY AVAILABLE, PRODUCT OFFERING AND MAY NOT OPERATE CORRECTLY.  RECIPIENT’S EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL LICENSE IS AT RECIPIENT’S SOLE DISCRETION AND RECIPIENT ASSUMES ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR AND RISK OF ANY AND ALL DAMAGES THAT MAY RESULT FROM OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE EXERCISE OF SUCH RIGHTS, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE LOSS OF ANY DATA OR OTHER CONTENT.




when a corp. it staff has to get this ok'ed  this kind of language can really slow them down or stop them altogether.
it dependns on the business and how they take to risk -- percived or real.

Nope, can't risk it. The core product I'm working with here has to be compliant with 21 CFR Part 11, FDA Class I Medical Device, and European IVDD regulations. Without a solid release date, there's too much risk involved in using the new framework. I'd have to know the date by August at the latest, and it realistically would need to be released no later than October so our validation could finish on time.

barogers wrote:

Nope, can't risk it. The core product I'm working with here has to be compliant with 21 CFR Part 11, FDA Class I Medical Device, and European IVDD regulations. Without a solid release date, there's too much risk involved in using the new framework. I'd have to know the date by August at the latest, and it realistically would need to be released no later than October so our validation could finish on time.

what about using active reports then?

it's ready for net 1.1, it's 100% .net
works for both asp.net and winforms.

not to costly.

and I have heard a *LOT* of good feedback on it.

www.datadynamics.com

http://www.datadynamics.com/Products/ProductOverview.aspx?Product=ARNET2