to db or not to db: SQL Server 2008

Here’s the question: Why would Microsoft come out with a new SQL Server as soon as the first quarter of next year? Perhaps they feel they need another release to keep up in the db-arms race with Oracle. Or maybe their Business Intelligence and Analysis Services side wasn’t figured as complete enough in SQL Server 2005. Perhaps they needed to make changes in order to sync better with the new Visual Studio due about the same time. The truth is probably a mix of the above and other reasons only a Chairman like Bill Gates fathoms.
The way this does Micro$oft a real disservice is that the serious DB shops (they are trying to convince to switch from other db’s) canNOT move that fast. It takes years to adjust reports, user interfaces, permissions and that leaves little time for development of new stuff. Some say it’s great for the software vendors because it requires new upgrades and thus renewing of support contracts and possibly new sales but I disagree. But even these companies have their limits in development cycles. With the decrease in skilled techies out there this problem will only grow.
I certainly won’t lie: I loved the improvements over SQL Server 2000 in 2005. Our shop was an early adopter of 2005. But it’s too soon for something new; five years is OK.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s