November 13, 2013 at 4:34 am
I strongly disagree with the idea of just pushing something out to fit a time frame, and this kind of mentality is the reason for IT having such a bad name. It also gives rise to the phrase, 'Don't use the software until the first service release.'
If I brought a television that worked most of the time but couldn't show certain channels for example or had faults, I would return it for a refund, and if it was not put down to a faulty unit I would use another company / brand next time. The same with software - it's the reason why lots of software does not get used within our company and to be frank, won't get a trial again for the foreseeable future.
I recently tried using SSMS 2012 and it is so riddled with bugs that it is uninstalled and I am back to using the 2008 tools. With SSMS being so riddled with bugs, I have no intention of trying the database engine any time soon. 2008 works perfectly for us.
November 13, 2013 at 6:47 am
Dale Turley (11/13/2013)
I strongly disagree with the idea of just pushing something out to fit a time frame, and this kind of mentality is the reason for IT having such a bad name. It also gives rise to the phrase, 'Don't use the software until the first service release.'If I brought a television that worked most of the time but couldn't show certain channels for example or had faults, I would return it for a refund, and if it was not put down to a faulty unit I would use another company / brand next time. The same with software - it's the reason why lots of software does not get used within our company and to be frank, won't get a trial again for the foreseeable future.
I recently tried using SSMS 2012 and it is so riddled with bugs that it is uninstalled and I am back to using the 2008 tools. With SSMS being so riddled with bugs, I have no intention of trying the database engine any time soon. 2008 works perfectly for us.
Curious, what bugs did you encounter in SSMS 2012? I installed it a couple of years back, use it most every day for both development and admin, and don't have any major complaints.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
November 13, 2013 at 7:15 am
Eric M Russell (11/13/2013)
Curious, what bugs did you encounter in SSMS 2012? I installed it a couple of years back, use it most every day for both development and admin, and don't have any major complaints.
To name a few:
Often, the PC would hang, the screen would go blank and the system tray would alert me that the display driver had to be reset. This has happened on multiple PCs around the IT department, so isn't singled to mine.
Using sp_helptext and copying into a new query window adds a carriage return between each line - rendering it fairly useless unless you use the 'results to text' option.
I have a share on the network where I save SQL scripts and other utilities. In 2008 I open this folder directly from SSMS, and each time I click open file it remembers the last location I opened - handy in a rush. 2012 does not, and often opens at the C:\Windows\System32 location??
This one was very weird - Opening a folder sometimes caused the open file dialog to disappear. I then had to maximize another window, normally outlook, to get the file dialog to reappear.
I sometimes received a 'System.OutOfMemory Exception' when viewing some execution plans. These plans render in 2008.
That was my dealings with SSMS 2012. I got rid and went back to 2208 after that...
November 13, 2013 at 8:18 am
Dale Turley (11/13/2013)
I strongly disagree with the idea of just pushing something out to fit a time frame, and this kind of mentality is the reason for IT having such a bad name. It also gives rise to the phrase, 'Don't use the software until the first service release.'If I brought a television that worked most of the time but couldn't show certain channels for example or had faults, I would return it for a refund, and if it was not put down to a faulty unit I would use another company / brand next time. The same with software - it's the reason why lots of software does not get used within our company and to be frank, won't get a trial again for the foreseeable future.
I agree yet people can't wait to get the newest version of Windows. Until customers demand a bug free version before purchasing this will not end.
November 13, 2013 at 8:27 am
Sqlraider (11/13/2013)
I agree yet people can't wait to get the newest version of Windows. Until customers demand a bug free version before purchasing this will not end.
I can see your point and yes, this is unfortunate really.
To my mind though, this is where the product experts, Microsoft in this case, should say no and make a release when the product is stable and as bomb proof as they can make it.
Even though most of the world uses Windows, it seems to be universally ridiculed as a half baked product. Ergo, the company look amateurish and incompetent -well rich, amateurish and incompetent... 😉
November 13, 2013 at 8:29 am
Sqlraider (11/13/2013)
Dale Turley (11/13/2013)
I strongly disagree with the idea of just pushing something out to fit a time frame, and this kind of mentality is the reason for IT having such a bad name. It also gives rise to the phrase, 'Don't use the software until the first service release.'If I brought a television that worked most of the time but couldn't show certain channels for example or had faults, I would return it for a refund, and if it was not put down to a faulty unit I would use another company / brand next time. The same with software - it's the reason why lots of software does not get used within our company and to be frank, won't get a trial again for the foreseeable future.
I agree yet people can't wait to get the newest version of Windows. Until customers demand a bug free version before purchasing this will not end.
It is as much down to the business model too. Microsoft, like many software producers, make money from selling perpetual licences i.e. pay once, use forever. This means that they need the money from support contracts and upgrades in order to still be in business. As their software has got more reliable and more mature in terms of features, Microsoft appear to be finding it harder to sell the upgrade path. Is this why PhotoShop cannot be purchased anymore and has gone subscription only?
There are alternative models and I am NOT opening the perpetual licence versus subscription debate NOR the proprietary versus open source software debate.
Personally, I have enough changing on a regular basis that I can handle a much slower upgrade road map. I now have the problem that there is an ever widening version gap between clients and I have to be reasonably familiar with many versions of many products.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
November 13, 2013 at 8:51 am
Gary Varga (11/13/2013)
Sqlraider (11/13/2013)
Dale Turley (11/13/2013)
I strongly disagree with the idea of just pushing something out to fit a time frame, and this kind of mentality is the reason for IT having such a bad name. It also gives rise to the phrase, 'Don't use the software until the first service release.'If I brought a television that worked most of the time but couldn't show certain channels for example or had faults, I would return it for a refund, and if it was not put down to a faulty unit I would use another company / brand next time. The same with software - it's the reason why lots of software does not get used within our company and to be frank, won't get a trial again for the foreseeable future.
I agree yet people can't wait to get the newest version of Windows. Until customers demand a bug free version before purchasing this will not end.
It is as much down to the business model too. Microsoft, like many software producers, make money from selling perpetual licences i.e. pay once, use forever.
Isn't this true of television manufacturers, carpet makers, stereo manufacturers, and... just about every other business?
Would you be happy with a new stereo that could only play sound from one speaker, as long as it was promised to be replaced with a working version within six months to a year?
I wouldn't. I'd buy a different one from a proper manufacturer.
November 13, 2013 at 9:16 am
Eric M Russell (11/13/2013)
Dale Turley (11/13/2013)
I strongly disagree with the idea of just pushing something out to fit a time frame, and this kind of mentality is the reason for IT having such a bad name. It also gives rise to the phrase, 'Don't use the software until the first service release.'If I brought a television that worked most of the time but couldn't show certain channels for example or had faults, I would return it for a refund, and if it was not put down to a faulty unit I would use another company / brand next time. The same with software - it's the reason why lots of software does not get used within our company and to be frank, won't get a trial again for the foreseeable future.
I recently tried using SSMS 2012 and it is so riddled with bugs that it is uninstalled and I am back to using the 2008 tools. With SSMS being so riddled with bugs, I have no intention of trying the database engine any time soon. 2008 works perfectly for us.
Curious, what bugs did you encounter in SSMS 2012? I installed it a couple of years back, use it most every day for both development and admin, and don't have any major complaints.
My SSMS 2012 has to close from errors a couple of times a week. If I have to compose a nontrivial amount of T-SQL I try not to do it in SSMS and if I do, I make sure I save copies elsewhere.
November 13, 2013 at 9:18 am
Dale Turley (11/13/2013)
Isn't this true of television manufacturers, carpet makers, stereo manufacturers, and... just about every other business?Would you be happy with a new stereo that could only play sound from one speaker, as long as it was promised to be replaced with a working version within six months to a year?
I wouldn't. I'd buy a different one from a proper manufacturer.
I get your point. It's somewhat fair, but not completely fair.
SSMS2012 works fine for me. Zero display issues, remembers my folders, no hangs (although it is slow). Some of your complaints sound like issues inside your environment/setup, some (like sp_helptext) may be bugs. I'm curious, do you have VS2012 issues? They're based on the same shell.
I think your analogy of only playing out one speaker is highly flawed. It's more like "i play my stereo outside and on a 200ft extention cord and it's not as loud as they said". You are noting specific flaws, and not general functionality. I'd argue SSMS is way more complex than TVs or stereos in terms of what it does.
Not to let MS go on some of these bugs. They certainly let slip some big ones through, and they ignore others, which is maddening. I certainly share your frustration, but about different things. In some sense, that's the issue; we cancel each other out.
I wish that some of these companies would get sued and be held more responsible for the shoddy work. They ought to be required to reduce their level of bugs below some level. Zero isn't possible, and most cars/TVs/etc don't have zero, but they should be low.
November 13, 2013 at 9:39 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (11/13/2013)
I get your point. It's somewhat fair, but not completely fair.SSMS2012 works fine for me. Zero display issues, remembers my folders, no hangs (although it is slow). Some of your complaints sound like issues inside your environment/setup, some (like sp_helptext) may be bugs. I'm curious, do you have VS2012 issues? They're based on the same shell.
I think your analogy of only playing out one speaker is highly flawed. It's more like "i play my stereo outside and on a 200ft extention cord and it's not as loud as they said". You are noting specific flaws, and not general functionality. I'd argue SSMS is way more complex than TVs or stereos in terms of what it does.
Not to let MS go on some of these bugs. They certainly let slip some big ones through, and they ignore others, which is maddening. I certainly share your frustration, but about different things. In some sense, that's the issue; we cancel each other out.
I wish that some of these companies would get sued and be held more responsible for the shoddy work. They ought to be required to reduce their level of bugs below some level. Zero isn't possible, and most cars/TVs/etc don't have zero, but they should be low.
I don't currently have VS2012 installed, to my knowledge. I have VS2010 and that does seem to work OK - then again, I only use the basic functionality of it.
Yes my example was extreme, granted. The point being though: you wouldn't be happy with a product you had gone out and brought having faults, so why accept them in software?
Another, hopefully better example then: If you brought a blu-ray player, only to find that the menus don't work - would you see that as shoddy? I would, and I would be thinking, 'if they got that wrong, what else have they missed?'
November 13, 2013 at 9:57 am
Isn't this true of television manufacturers, carpet makers, stereo manufacturers, and... just about every other business?
Would you be happy with a new stereo that could only play sound from one speaker, as long as it was promised to be replaced with a working version within six months to a year?
I wouldn't. I'd buy a different one from a proper manufacturer.
First generations of many manufactured products and electronics tend to have reputations just as sketchy as microsoft software.
I have often heard not to be first model years of a redesigned car. Brand new electronics often see the excitement of the new version be fixes of a bunch of stuff the users found annoying with the old version.
In short, this example kind of works against you. Software is not the only industry that ships before its perfect. Everyone that selling something sets their own threshold of "good enough".
November 13, 2013 at 2:18 pm
I have seen quite a few DVD/BluRay players in the last decade like that. I've returned some and gotten others, quality has not improved. At some point I've lived with it. Or I've moved on and gone to more streaming, though many of those "apps", which are software, don't work well.
I see the same thing with tools. There are times that things don't work well, or seem to suffer quality issues. Sometimes I return them, sometimes I get by.
There's no easy answer. However I do think some sort of warranty is reasonable for software, as is the ability to return it or sell it to others.
November 14, 2013 at 2:31 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (11/13/2013)
I have seen ... ...software, don't work well.
Haven't we all?
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (11/13/2013)
...I do think some sort of warranty is reasonable for software...
Absolutely!!!
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
November 14, 2013 at 7:15 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (11/13/2013)
I have seen quite a few DVD/BluRay players in the last decade like that. I've returned some and gotten others, quality has not improved. At some point I've lived with it. Or I've moved on and gone to more streaming, though many of those "apps", which are software, don't work well.I see the same thing with tools. There are times that things don't work well, or seem to suffer quality issues. Sometimes I return them, sometimes I get by.
There's no easy answer. However I do think some sort of warranty is reasonable for software, as is the ability to return it or sell it to others.
When a DVD/BluRay player fails to load a disk, the root problem may be the manufactoring quality of the disk itself. Some players have better error handling at the hardware or software level to compensate for a poor encoding or defective disk. Engineers are provided with specifications about what variations in encoding are to be expected and what tollerance levels they should work within.
It's the same way with ETL and data formats. For example, what should we do when a patient's date of birth = '1982-02-29'; raise an exception, reject the record, or recode it as '1982-02-28' ? The business has to make that decision and include the scenario in the specifications.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
November 19, 2013 at 4:12 am
Re the argument about quality and shipping, I find this quote I heard several years ago to be quite apposite.
"A Morris Minor that is 100% complete will get you further than a Rolls Royce that is 90% complete".
Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 82 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply