A Career Poll
-
I've been accused of being a Microsoft shill. More specifically a SQL Server shill at times because I promote SQL Server, sometimes at the expense of MySQL, Oracle, etc. While we do promote SQL Server here, we don't get paid by Microsoft, so we're not shills, we're honks. Microsoft generously donated some licenses, and I actually need to ask for a new one for SS2K5, but they don't buy any advertising or provide any support to the site.
But I believe in this product. I have used it, worked with it, and if I didn't like it, I wouldn't spend so much of my life writing about it and promoting it's use. Instead I'd be running OracleForSnobs.com or CheapAsCanBeMySQLCentral.com. So in keeping with that, this week's poll is:
How Did You Come to SQL Server?
Whether you're a developer, a DBA, a manager, or an SMS guy like my buddy Dean, what brought you to work with SQL Server and do you like it?
I've answered the second part, but a little background on the first. I used to work in a nuclear power plant, Surrey Power Plant, to be precise. There I was on the network team that supported the station's various computers. Mostly PCs, but a VAX and a few other minis. One fine New Years Eve I was sitting in the station helping to upgrade our mission critical radiation monitoring and tracking application (used for workers, not the plant) from some old system to a brand new C++ app running against Microsoft SQL Server 4.2 (no a, no b) on OS/2 1.3. We implemented this as per federal regulation for an outage beginning shortly after the first of the year when workers would be streaming in and out of the reactor for maintenance.Let me tell you that database server ran at full speed like a drunken sailor on the day after payday coming down the hill in San Francisco late reporting back to his ship. I say his because a female sailor would spend the money on a taxi
.So needless to say I wasn't thrilled with this amazing product, but I started digging into it to learn more about it and hopefully fix it. I never did, but I learned alot by using the "probe" account (anyone remember that?) to gather information about our server and the one at a sister station and dig around in what was happening. It was fascinating to me and when I was promoted, I wanted to do more database work (outside of the Clipper/Foxpro work I'd been doing). In my next position as a developer I worked with Oracle, 7 I think. Yikes! Not as much fun for me. But still interesting and if I would have stuck with that, maybe I'd like Oracle better.
Instead the 100 mile commute got to me and with SQL Server on my resume, I ended up working again with SQL Server 4.2 (b, this time on Windows 3.51). I thought this was ok, but the upgrade to v.6, followed a few months later by v6.5, really hooked me. I liked the product and it ran well for me. Not to say we didn't have issues, but this was a nice software product in '96 or so.
Since then I've continued through all the versions and I have really been pleased with the evolutions and the work Microsoft's done on the product. I'm not saying it's the best platform, but it works fantastically for me, and has in many companies. And it does the job I ask it to do.
Steve Jones
-
I started back in Feb 2000. I joined a new company (INT 21) and on day one they sat me down with a book called "Data Warehousing on SQL Server 7.0" or something. It was a great education cos I learnt about SQL Server, DTS, Analysis Services plus more theoretical stuff like data warehousing constructs...star schemas etc...
From then on I was hooked on BI in general and SQL Server BI specifically. My first work proper was implementing a now sadly defunct product called Broadbase (sometimes known as BroadVision Analytics or Kana Analytics). That was essentially a database and highly performant ETL engine but did use SQL Server in a secondary capacity for metadata repository and it also used AS7.0 on top of it - so that was fun.
And that was that - I never looked back!
Do I like it? Definately - I wouldn't do this otherwise.
-Jamie
Jamie Thomson
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/jamie_thomson -
I started working with SQL Server 6.5 a few months before 7.0 was released. I'd started a business after building an idea into a product called Plant-Wide Webs (it was one of the first web-based Manufacturing Execution Systems, but who knew?). PWW used Access (I know, I know - in my defense, it only used the database portion, nothing else) version 2.0 I think.
When PWW started pumping too much data into Access, I moved up to SQL Server. I was impressed with the product and have enjoyed working with it ever since.
The word that comes to mind when I consider SQL Server is "balance." I like the approach Microsoft has taken with the product in marketing, pricing, licensing, support, and continued development.
:{> Andy
Andy Leonard, Chief Data Engineer, Enterprise Data & Analytics
-
I fell into SQL Server shortly after starting a job, I used to develop small business systems using MS Access, but upon starting a new job back in June 2001, I was told pretty much in my first week, 'oh by the way there is a server in the warehouse what needs building, configuring and SQL Server 2000 installing on it, can you sort that out and migrate system x from a devlopment SQL server 7 to SQL server 2000 and have it ready for production ASAP' and that was it I have been SQL Server 2000 ever since with bits of Oracle integration and playing with MYSQL to run with a PHP CMS. The joys of communication.
-
My IT Career started as a Data Entry operator in 1985, became the Computer Room Tape librarian, then got promoted into the database group as our Infopac/Document Direct Online Report Admin. I began taking on DBA duties supporting our old Datacom DBs as we were converting from Datacom to Mainframe DB2. In 1994 I became a fulltime DB2 DBA. Around 1996 we purchased an application that ran on SQL Server for our Legal Dept. and I was picked to support it... SQL Server 6.0 running on NT 3.5. Since then we have exploded with SQL Server apps... over 50 now. I have since then dropped my DB2 DBA duties and have begun to support Oracle as well, but my true duties are still SQL Server. All of this with the same company !
-
The polling of older model copiers and fax machines to obtain their status and facilitate billing / repairs was done by a server app with a SQL SERVER 6.5 backend. I was asked to build some other database apps that would include some features which struck a cord that we could take from getting another licence of SQL SERVER as it turned out it was up to version 2K by that point.
So I recommeded the SQL SERVER over lighter or heavier systems, and we never turned back.
I find SQL Server to be great. Much better than tetris.
-
My first exposure to SQL Server was 6 years ago. I started out my IT career as a hardware/network guy who also worked as the company webmaster. While investigating ways to improve the website, I learned about databases. The first exposure was to mySQL then to SQL Server 7. I gradually moved from HTML to CFML, to PHP, to ASP, to .NET. It was ASP programming that I really learned to appreciate the product MS had put out and discovered I had a knack for data. The company I am at now recognised that and placed me in the database department when it was formed.
-
You are a bunch of newbies! I remember way back when databases were flat files on an Atari. Dbase, Rbase, CISAM, Access, DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, Clarion and several proprietory apps have all come and gone. A new type that I am interested in is called Sentences. RDBMS has been around for a long time and will be for some time, but everything must grow and change, so don't stop learning.
-
Started three years ago as Our IT Manager needed a Application/DBA type of guy and since I worked previously with Foxpro and MS Access, they thought I could do the job. So I started briefly on SQL Server 7.0 and then quickly moved on to 2000. Had to learned from scratch as I had no DBA experience.
Recently, I went to an Oracle Administration course, we have on application that still does not run on SQL Server yet. That course helped me understand the nuts and bolts of how a DBMS works.
Now, comparing the two, I would understand why Unix based type of guy would prefer Oracle on top of SQL Server. You control more of the things from the beginning with Oracle. SQL Server does a lot of things for you.
Unless you are a big data warehouse place, SQL Server will get the job done. And with 2005, I am sure you can do pretty much like Oracle or DB2.
The more you work with something, the less you are tempted to move to something else. So I guess I will stick with SQL Server (we are a Microsoft place here, we want everything to work on Microsoft and integrate). I am currently working on my MCDBA and after, will move to the 2005 certification as well.
Go with what you are comfortable with and life will be easier.
-
I think it was 1997 or 1998 when I was first exposed to MS SQL. Before that it was Oracle - [Little Britain]I don't like it.[/Little Britain]
I've been working exclusively with SQL Server 2000 since about 2001. I think it's great. Recently, I bought some .net web hosting and I use MS SQL as the database on there. I use it at home for my own personal .net projects and can easily move everything up to the web server for going live.
-
Way back in 1992-1993, I was a network admin working with a crappy Novell 2.14 system. Back then, IT people worked for the CFO and controllers and ours was too cheap to upgrade to Novell 3.12. Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and NT 3.1 had just come out and I was able to convince the controller and to put the money on NT. For less than the price of the Novell upgrade we were able to get NT and SQL Server. This was before the Sybase/Microsoft split. Of course, we had to migrate our Btrieve applications/databases to SQL.
I've been hooked since. I don't get as much opportunity to work with it now, but I prefer it to Oracle as my new job is in an Oracle shop.
Joe Johnson
NETDIO,LLC. -
Well I had been working on Oracle but switched projects back in 1998 or 1999. I had been doing Y2K stuff with a completely useless totally incompetent and technologically ignorant idioit running the project. So leaving was a good thing.
I was called into the boss's office one day and asked what I knew about SQL Server. I said I could spell it. The boss's response: "Great! You're our new SQL Server Guru."
So I started with 6.5 (IMHO Oracle 7 blew it away) went to SQL 7 and said this is a nice jump. (IMHO almost to Oracle 7) and then went to SQL 2000 which is a decent database.
I have worked with both, I like the front end tools of SQL Server better, but I still beleive that Oracle is the better choice for huge databases and certain advanced features. Overall I do like working with SQL Server.
That's my Story, Brian
-
I am using MSSQL because last year I got a job where it's in use. I am not enthusiastic about it, but I try my best to learn as much as I can.
Steve,
I want to comment on your Oracle vs. SQL server statements. First off, let me say that I am not an Oracle fan. If I had a choice, I'd be using MySQL or DB2, depending on the budget. About your first exposure to SQL server, you said "So needless to say I wasn't thrilled with this amazing product, but I started digging into it to learn more about it and hopefully fix it." And then about Oracle you said, "In my next position as a developer I worked with Oracle, 7 I think. Yikes! Not as much fun for me." It looks like you had problems in both areas, and you were not exactly happy with either database. However, for some reason you were willing to give Microsoft some slack, while on the other hand you wanted to throw Oracle as far away from you as possible. Why the difference? If ANYBODY were to go research the differences in MSSQL/Oracle at that time, it would be obvious that Oracle had more features and stability. And if you had "started digging into it to learn more about" Oracle, I think you would have learned it just as well as you eventually learned MSSQL. My guess is you were pretty familiar with MSSQL when you were exposed to Oracle. And since Oracle was such a hard core developer's database at the time (no GUIs), you were very uncomfortable with it. My first exposure to Oracle was in college, taking an Oracle class. I still don't like Oracle, even after that class and later a job using it. But I recognize that it is an excellent database that is getting more friendly to use all the time.
-
I was two years from retiring from the U.S. Air Force and looking for a new career. I attended a job fair and asked each company....if I wanted to work for you, what skill would you advise me to learn. The most common one was Oracle Programmer. So, I took training to become an Oracle Programmer. Then I retired. Went job hunting, guess what? No one wanted to hire me until I had some experience. Finally, I got hired. The company used a vendor's (VendorA) product that did not have a 'combined' database. Every computer held it's own data and the only way to compare anything was verbally. "Hey, did you see this on your computer?". A different vendor (VendorB) claimed to have a database that would combine all the individual databases and it used Oracle. What I didn't know was that the company hiring me really wanted me as a DBA and didn't understand that (at least with Oracle) the two really aren't the same. However, with my programming skills, I was able to document that VendorB did NOT have a finished product and was developing it using our resources (me and our equipment). We cancelled that contract. VendorA saw 'the writing on the wall' and came up with their own combined database for their product. Yep! They used Microsoft SQL Server 2000. So, it became a case of 'you know Oracle, so you should be able to administer SQL Server'. Taught myself all I could about DBA'ing and finally convinced the powers that be to send me to classes. I've been the only DBA since July of 2001.
One big thing I've learned...learning on your own is okay, class lessons is better, but the best of all would be to have a mentor to guide you. I've learned on my own and in class. Never had a 'true' mentor, but I consider everyone on this site my mentors.
Thanks for all the help you've given me over the years.
-SQLBill
-
Jake,
I think you hit it on the head. The MS product was different, but interesting. The instability was mostly on OS2 and when we hit OS2 2.1, it ran better.
However, Oracle was radically different and the lack of front end tools made it a pain. Add to that the fact I was developing not admin'ing, and I didn't enjoy it as much.
If I'd been exposed in the other order, who knows?
Oracle's not a bad product. Just didn't work for me at that time (in terms of enjoyment).
I've answered the second part, but a little background on the first. I used to work in a nuclear power plant, Surrey Power Plant, to be precise. There I was on the network team that supported the station's various computers. Mostly PCs, but a VAX and a few other minis. One fine New Years Eve I was sitting in the station helping to upgrade our mission critical radiation monitoring and tracking application (used for workers, not the plant) from some old system to a brand new C++ app running against Microsoft SQL Server 4.2 (no a, no b) on OS/2 1.3. We implemented this as per federal regulation for an outage beginning shortly after the first of the year when workers would be streaming in and out of the reactor for maintenance.Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply