Post reply

Yukon Delayed Again and Named

  • March 10, 2004 at 7:29 pm

    #107447

    Comments posted to this topic are about the content posted at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/bknight/yukon.asp

    Brian Knight
    Free SQL Server Training Webinars

  • March 11, 2004 at 12:45 am

    #498218

    i agree with you, that a stable product its better.

    And yes, database mirroring would be one of the best new features.

    Henrik

  • March 11, 2004 at 3:03 am

    #498227

    I do agree also that Microsoft should take care to have a stable product , but also a secure product.

    Like the author I think Microsoft should consider to release some intermediate version of SQL Server 2000 with some improvements.

    It seems they're planning to do something similar with Windows 2003 and Windows XP.

    There are pro's and cons for this policy. If the changes are not to big and do not require to big investments of the customers, this is the right policy.

    The upgrades should be more gradualy.

    Erik

  • March 11, 2004 at 4:37 am

    #498233

    I'm hoping that this is to become a trend with Microsoft. I have almost always worked with small to medium enterprises and selling them on a new DBMS or OS is always a hard slog. I am always keen to work with the latest release but SMEs have to see several valuable improvements before they will commit their cash. In this respect holding out for a really attractive upgrade is, in my opinion, a good move by Microsoft.

    Speed

  • March 11, 2004 at 6:23 am

    #498259

    Since SQL Server's conception, it has come an awful long ways.  It's nice to see that stability and good security have been taken into account within this new version of SQL Server.  However, like any good development, testing environment BETA cycle, all I've seen is delays in getting this out the door (which is actually a good thing).  But publicity wise, maybe wait to send new release notifications out on a new software product (or upgraded version) until it's more concrete on what's happening.  I think it will keep the IT world alike more excited about something new, especially if it's an upgrade or newer version of a software that is widely used.   But like everyone else, I can't wait to see YUKON (SQL Server 2005)  in action. Thanks for the update.  Julie

  • March 11, 2004 at 5:41 pm

    #498419

    With so many new features, YUKON (Sql Sever 2005) needs to get them very stable and secure before releasing regardless of the other licensing programs Microsoft customers have purchased. 

    I would like to see these things sooner just like everyone else waiting for this release.  But I like the new not at the risk of exposing our customers to unpleasantness approach.  This delibrate approach to releasing new features is a welcomed thing from Microsoft.  I remember the transition for 4.2 to 6.0 and how painful that could be on some fronts.  __PETER

  • March 12, 2004 at 1:01 am

    #498445

    If all the new features live up to the hype, it sounds wonderful.

    I like the idea of a Dedicated Administrator Connection. New! Improved! T-SQL sounds good too, and if the Integrated Toolset has good monitoring + management tools (ala SQLProbe) I'd be very happy.

    I'd be very wary of an Online Restore and would probably avoid it as best as I could. If data was corrupted you might only discover it months later?

    I'd be interested to find out more about the SQL Service Broker - the description on MS's site doesn't give much info.

    Cheers


    The Aethyr Dragon

    Cape Town
    RSA

  • March 12, 2004 at 4:36 am

    #498469

    Given the importance of data in the corporate environment I think Microsoft have made a good call.

    If YUKON is as big a jump forward as VS.NET then it will have been worth the wait.

    Hopefully it will be stable and secure with no "buffer overrun" security glitches.

    LinkedIn Profile

  • March 12, 2004 at 6:13 am

    #498482

    I agree, a secure stable product gets my vote even if it is delayed an entire year. I just hope that what I have seen posted about ending support for SQL Server 2000 is extented out much further than it is currently listed. We here will need more than a year to convert all of our SQL Servers.. not to mention having to wait for all the software package companies to certify their software on SQL Server 2005 first ! I would doubt we would put SQL Server 2005 in production before the first service pack anyway.

  • March 12, 2004 at 8:24 am

    #498527

    The delay is good in my opinion.  I have played with Yukon Beta 1 and am very impressed but the "Not Yet Implemented" message box from the GUI was a bit annoying so I am anxiously awaiting Beta 2.  It also made me wonder if they would be able to get a RTM version ready by the deadline.

    Anyhow, I want and NEED a stable environment.  With all the enhancements coming (DB Mirroring, .Net integration, the awesome workbench,...) I am a bit worried about the stability of the product.  Also, SECURITY should be a major concern! 

    In my environment, I am constantly competing with another division that is set on Oracle.  So far I have been able to fend them off with several factors and features and being able to integrate with them.  They have seen how stable our setup is and that is helping.  I don't want to lose any ground because the next version isn't stable and secure.

    SJ

     

    Accepting all invites

  • March 12, 2004 at 10:27 am

    #498556

    I echo most of what's above. Stability and Security need to be to notch before this is released. I wouldn't mind some interim release stuff, but more I'd like more and smaller service packs. The once a quarter didn't work for NT and it won't work for SQL, but if we could count on 2 SPs a year that rolled up fixes, that certainly would help my hundreds of servers.

  • March 15, 2004 at 2:58 pm

    #498848

    Quote:

    Also looming is the announced end of mainstream support of SQL Server 2000, which will end on December 31st 2005. If SQL Server 2005 doesn’t release until the second quarter of 2005, this may only give a customer 6 months to upgrade their database environment before facing a support problem. Typically Microsoft has extended this end of mainstream support date in events like this in the past and you may see this announcement coming soon.

    Support a product for only 6 months after the latest version comes out?  WTF!  This is very NOT COOL and Microsoft better clarify soon.  For many shops, upgrading within a year will be an issue, much less 6 months.  And how 'bout software that is SQL2K dependent?  They'll have to develop an upgrade version before their customers can upgrade dependent databases, and there's no way that can happen in 6 months.  Also, what about businesses that can't afford to upgrade immediately?  They will be left high and dry as far as support is concerned.

    Microsoft better watch out; the time frame for upgrading to SQL2K5 will be the same timeframe that mySQL will be taking off it's training wheels.  If they're not extremely cool about this they risk loosing customers.

    Signature is NULL

  • March 17, 2004 at 5:48 pm

    #499238

    Readers shouldnt block writers and writers shouldnt block readers.

    When can I have that in a very, very stable release?

    Anil

  • March 11, 2005 at 6:24 am

    #546594

    If Windows 95 is any sort of indicator, that must mean that SQL Server 2005 will be available in June 2007.

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply