They won’t be jumping to 2008. This category of user hardly ever upgrades to the latest and greatest – they upgrade to the most recent, most bug-free version. After all, most of the functionality in a SQL-based application is coded into the application.
Yeah, sure howl me down, because you’re storing all sorts of procedures inside SQL Server but most people never do that. To them it’s just a place to park data and the faster the better but not at the expense of reliability and uptime.
A SQL backend is something you don’t want to muck about with all day – it’s just supposed to work. And mostly, Microsoft has got this code pretty much right, and certainly got the pricing right for small business users.
No doubt the third service pack for SQL Server 2005 will be required because something in there is making the upgrade to SQL Server 2008 a bit glitchy.
The evidence for this wild assumption is based on SQL Server 2005 SP2 which was required before Vista clients could start using the CRM system or anything else which had a SQL backend. So methinks SP3 is just going to be all the bits of string and sealing wax which gets issued from now until then, all rolled up in a shiny ball, plus whatever that annoying glitch is which stops some SQL Server 2005 databases from playing nice with SQL Server 2008.
And while we’re handing out free advice, how about the marketroids at Microsoft invent a clever name for their database? Well, just about everything else they sell has a clever name expect for the “server” and the “database”. What happened? Did the guy who owned the whiteboard take it back before the brainstorming product marketers were done with it? How about sliding in a new name along with the bug fixes at SP3? At least it would save typing SQL Server 2008 out in full all the time. Macro? Yeah, well, Word 2008 put a stop to those.
Microsoft SQL Server 2005 opinion: Service pack me
By Ian Yates on Apr 18, 2008 4:48PM