April 4, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item How To Fix Connect
April 5, 2011 at 12:52 am
Hey Steve,
it seems that most of these items were closed and marked as "Won't Fix", which I assume means these will not be fixed for SQL 11.
I'm not sure if your assumption holds.
I had a few of my submitted suggestions closed as "Won't Fix" recently. All of them had a comment added by Microsoft. I don't recall the exact words, but paraphrasing it, I'd say: "good idea, but there are many good ideas, we can't implement them all, and honestly, we think this idea will never prioritize high enough to make the cut - so we'll just be clear up front and tell you we won't do it".
Oh wait, here is the exact text from one of my closed suggestions:
Thank you for submitting this suggestion, but given its priority relative to the many other items in our queue, it is unlikely that we will actually complete it. As such, we are closing this suggestion as “won’t fix”. If you feel that this is worth reconsidering, feel free to reopen it and we will take another look.
April 5, 2011 at 4:17 am
Hi Steve,
I agree with you on the overall. However, I didn't quite understand your specific reference to the "brilliant" duplicate indexes note.
Could you expand on this?
Thanks and regards,
David.
April 5, 2011 at 6:17 am
All I can say is, if they don't revert or improve Activity Monitor, I'm going to roll my own. 2008 AM has to be the most user-unfriendly interface I've seen in a long, long time.
I'm sure someone has placed this request on Connect. Haven't they? Or am I alone in my disgust over this?
April 5, 2011 at 6:34 am
Strange timing that you should post this editorial now...
We are in the midst of working with one of the largest organizations in the United States (I am not at liberty to mention the client) and this organization has told Microsoft that they intend to stay on Windows XP and Office 2003 - that they will not accept Windows 7 or Office 2007/2010 at this time. They went through months of discussions with Microsoft and explained why they were rejecting these products. Allegedly, Microsoft listened intently and then went off and ignored every suggestion and reason why this client would not accept these products.
The client explained that the Office systems failed their acceptance because the changes in the interface, notably "the ribbon" (and more) seemed just plain silly. They found no benefit in upgrading, and in fact told Microsoft that the rollout, conversion and learning costs were prohibitive. They rejected Windows 7 (and Vista) largely due to the silly "Are you sure" security (UAC) elements, and again, found that rollout and learning costs were prohibitive, with no real gain to their organization in upgrading.
As best I can see, Microsoft is no longer a technology driven company, its a sales driven company. Microsoft goes to great lengths to appear as though they are listening when they are not really listening - they are re-packaging the same products over and over again to keep selling us the same thing with a new face over and over again.
SQL Server used to stand aside from these shenanigans. There was benefit in each successive release. I am not sure even this will last all that long.
If you are just putting new lipstick on a pig every few years, that will work for a time - and you don't need to listen to any suggestions from the field - once that mindset takes hold, as it appears it has at MS, it spreads like a virus. I for one, am not particularly surprised that MS Connect is becoming somewhat useless. Sales deadlines now appear to rule at MS - and the losers in that, are us. But without any real competition what are the alternatives? Simple: we live with it, and march in lockstep to Microsoft's ever-changing tempo of the same old, re-packaged song.
April 5, 2011 at 7:40 am
Steve,
Just to say up front that I've never used Connect so no first-hand experience. But, could it be that they've just closed the window for new functionality for Denali and are moving into the testing phase? Even if so, replying "May Consider for Next Release" instead of a somewhat rude "Won't Fix" would at least be good PR, especially for requests that have been voted up.
April 5, 2011 at 8:28 am
David McKinney (4/5/2011)
Hi Steve,I agree with you on the overall. However, I didn't quite understand your specific reference to the "brilliant" duplicate indexes note.
Could you expand on this?
Thanks and regards,
David.
The entire submission of this item was: "It's time to fix the problem of Duplicate indexes. "
That's it. Not very helpful, is it? What's the problem? What scope is there? This is the type of submission that would certainly annoy me.
April 5, 2011 at 8:29 am
Hugo Kornelis (4/5/2011)
Hey Steve,I'm not sure if your assumption holds.
Not an assumption, or it wasn't for me. I had 4 items closed with no comment. A week or so later someone came back and actually added a few sentences of feedback.
I think that there are valid reasons for closing items, especially as they look to move forward to the next version beyond SQL 11, but it's still a little disconcerting to have some submissions closed with very little feedback.
April 5, 2011 at 8:31 am
Randy Rabin (4/5/2011)
Steve,Just to say up front that I've never used Connect so no first-hand experience. But, could it be that they've just closed the window for new functionality for Denali and are moving into the testing phase? Even if so, replying "May Consider for Next Release" instead of a somewhat rude "Won't Fix" would at least be good PR, especially for requests that have been voted up.
I agree. There should be some way to "delay" the suggestion to the future and allow people to vote on it in the future.
I'd still like to see some ordering of what they consider possible or a good idea, and let the community give them more feedback, especially for marginal items.
April 5, 2011 at 8:42 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (4/5/2011)
David McKinney (4/5/2011)
Hi Steve,I agree with you on the overall. However, I didn't quite understand your specific reference to the "brilliant" duplicate indexes note.
Could you expand on this?
Thanks and regards,
David.
The entire submission of this item was: "It's time to fix the problem of Duplicate indexes. "
That's it. Not very helpful, is it? What's the problem? What scope is there? This is the type of submission that would certainly annoy me.
OK...I get you! Sorry...sometimes I need a picture!
April 5, 2011 at 8:43 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (4/5/2011)
David McKinney (4/5/2011)
Hi Steve,I agree with you on the overall. However, I didn't quite understand your specific reference to the "brilliant" duplicate indexes note.
Could you expand on this?
Thanks and regards,
David.
The entire submission of this item was: "It's time to fix the problem of Duplicate indexes. "
That's it. Not very helpful, is it? What's the problem? What scope is there? This is the type of submission that would certainly annoy me.
There was 1 very valid point to the ticket, don't let us create perfectly 100% the same index just using different names. I understand that th efull scope of this could be very cumbersome, but just doing a simple warning with sorry but you seem to already have that index wouldn't be too hard to put in place.
April 5, 2011 at 9:10 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (4/5/2011)
Hugo Kornelis (4/5/2011)
Hey Steve,I'm not sure if your assumption holds.
Not an assumption, or it wasn't for me. I had 4 items closed with no comment. A week or so later someone came back and actually added a few sentences of feedback.
I think that there are valid reasons for closing items, especially as they look to move forward to the next version beyond SQL 11, but it's still a little disconcerting to have some submissions closed with very little feedback.
In my experience, at least in the past, if they consider a feedback item for a future release, they will not close it. They usually add a comment (like "will consider for future relase" or so) and keep it open.
It is of course possible that they changed their policy - but I think that if your items were closed as "won't fix", it means exactly that: they won't be fixed.
(And disappointing as that may be -I know I was disappointed by the closing of some of my suggestions-, it may help to briefly consider the enormous amount of bugs and suggestions in connect in order to realize that there is no way the SQL Server engineering team will ever find the time to fix everything. They HAVE to choose)
April 5, 2011 at 9:11 am
I have issues with Connect as well. Although I've never used it for SQL issues, I've tried looking through it for other Microsoft software I was using, and couldn't find anything in Connect related to the issues I was having. This, to me, seemed very limiting. It was as if Microsoft was severely restricting what they would consider. I understand the need to focus upon the primary products, but given the size of Microsoft, I would think they could allocate someone to look at more than the dozen or so products they seem to only consider in Connect. For that reason, I gave up on Connect a very long time ago.
Kindest Regards, Rod Connect with me on LinkedIn.
April 5, 2011 at 9:59 pm
I agree with the general gist of posts re tech/solutions driven and sales driven. I would dearly like more info on the BIG company that is pushing back as we are also a (bigish) company and are facing the same issues. I have also just switched to 2008 development tools (BIDS/SSMS) and while I am happy with Management Studio BIDS 2008 is a giant leap backwards, to add insult to injury there is still no BIDS 2008 R2... and no word when...
But back to the point: At the risk of getting shot I would suggest that the ability to post be somehow restricted to practitioners (in short people with licences) as I suspect that quite a few queries are from non professionals working with free software who have never bothered with any education, even as rudimentary as one of the numerous excellent books available on all the components of SQL server.
Do or do not. There is no try...
April 5, 2011 at 10:17 pm
BWAA-HAA!!!! I know why they rejected all those things as a "low priority".... they're building a "ribbon bar" for SSMS! :-):-D;-):-P:hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply