SQL Server 2008 r2

re: SQL Server 2008 r2

Tanoshimi — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:20:45 GMT

Virtual Earth integration? Don't you mean "Bing Maps For Enterprise" integration?!

(I had no issue with the Virtual Earth name anyway, but if it had to be rebranded, surely "Microsoft Maps" would have worked better... sigh.)

SQL Server Lifecycle and Support

Andrew Fryer's Blog — Thu, 28 May 2009 20:00:39 GMT

My post announcing the next version of SQL Server picked up a couple of comments and rather than squeeze

re: SQL Server 2008 r2

Andrew.Fryer — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:07:14 GMT

Guys intersting comments whihc I will deal with in my next post

Andrew

re: SQL Server 2008 r2

Shihab Hassan — Tue, 26 May 2009 20:00:08 GMT

Microsoft once again going over board by doing things more to complicate the products. Why can't we just keep things as simple and leave the core alone. People can always add things if they want to.

Are you joking?

consultant — Sat, 23 May 2009 14:09:16 GMT

This is not funny anymore. I am a big fan of Microsoft products, but this is too much. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO BUILD SUSTAINABLE IT CORE if you have to watch that maybe next week your just-installed SQL Server will become obsolete and unsupported! I'm gonna switch my mind to Oracle, which is more long-lasting product. I'm sure 11g will EASILY survive next 10 years, whereas in Microsoft world I'll have to reinstall my fundamental infrastructure several times. I refuse to accept it. It's not cost-wise or business-wise. Thanks for the article.

re: SQL Server 2008 r2

Michael Swart — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:40:47 GMT

I'm holding out for SQL Server 2008 Threepio.

(sorry couldn't help it :-)