April 30, 2012 at 10:36 am
nice and straightforward.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 30, 2012 at 7:15 pm
Hugo Kornelis (4/30/2012)
One of the links you included in your message is this one: https://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/sql-2012-editions.aspx.On that page, just above the heading "SQL Server 2012 Capabilities", is the footnote.
Arghh! Different definitions of footnote - I was looking for something at the foot of the page. But I shouldn't have missed that anyway, it's on that page. My only excuse for missing it is that I generally ignore that sort of page, because (a) I can get more information about product features from BoL and (b) it's better to talk to an expert about the licensing than read the marketeer-speak.
Tom
April 30, 2012 at 11:05 pm
KWymore (4/30/2012)
L' Eomot Inversé (4/30/2012)
paul.knibbs (4/30/2012)
L' Eomot Inversé (4/30/2012)
I though it was easy until I saw that more than half of the people who answered so far got it wrong. 😉
Might be because the Microsoft page about SQL 2012 editions only mentions Web, Express and Developer as a footnote...
I haven't seen that page; the BoL page Editions and Components of SQL Server 2012 has all the editions, none of them relegated to footnotes.
But the non-Bol page referred to in the explanation lists only the three principal editions and doesn't even have the others in footnotes, and the editions page it points too is equally awful, as is the word document it also refers to. So I see your point, although I don't see the page you found. Of course these are marketing pages, not technical ones.
Looks like the marketing/sales types screwed up the technical story again - why does that happen so much in almost every company in the world?
I am sure that was a rhetorical question but from what I have seen, marketing types are trying to get the most sales so they only push the parts that will make the most money. They usually push the versions with the heaviest feature sets to wow over customers in hope of making big sales. The more minimalist versions may be all that a customer actually needs but those versions also cost less and thus generate less sales $. It's like car advertisements where they advertise the version of a car that has all the options and looks really flashy but they list the base model's starting price, not the price of the car that is actually in the ad with all the extras. If they do, it is in really tiny print and usually only on the screen for a second.
At least the main SQL 2012 editions page http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/sql-2012-editions.aspx"> http://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/sql-2012-editions.aspx had the other versions as a footnote. Some companies really make you dig for the scaled down versions or you have to call a sales rep before you can even get that information.
I know I am a tad late, but I beg to differ. Microsoft is learning that the best strategy AND tactic is to push products that create new market and predictable long-tail revenue stream, not necessarily the ones with the biggest margin this quarter.
The point: SharePoint 2010 has held the record how fast a software product made $1B. (62 days, BTW.) However, if you sell a SharePoint 2010 license for $50k, you saturate the market and you (for all intents and purposes) cannot sell another license (or a bundle of licenses) for at least 3 years.
SharePoint was beaten by Gears of War 3 which made $1B in 57 days. The difference is that the gamers who bought GW3 are usually back in say 60 days and wait for GW4, or a game by the same studio, preferably by the same designer.
Business changes.
May 1, 2012 at 1:27 am
L' Eomot Inversé (4/30/2012)
Hugo Kornelis (4/30/2012)
One of the links you included in your message is this one: https://www.microsoft.com/sqlserver/en/us/sql-2012-editions.aspx.On that page, just above the heading "SQL Server 2012 Capabilities", is the footnote.
Arghh! Different definitions of footnote - I was looking for something at the foot of the page. But I shouldn't have missed that anyway, it's on that page. My only excuse for missing it is that I generally ignore that sort of page, because (a) I can get more information about product features from BoL and (b) it's better to talk to an expert about the licensing than read the marketeer-speak.
Don't be too hard on yourself. I had looked over that page a few times already without seeing the footnote before I saw Paul's comment. And even after that, I still had to look two times before I finally found it.
May 1, 2012 at 1:45 am
Hugo Kornelis (5/1/2012)
Don't be too hard on yourself. I had looked over that page a few times already without seeing the footnote before I saw Paul's comment. And even after that, I still had to look two times before I finally found it.
That was really the point I was making--it took me several attempts to find it on that page myself!
May 1, 2012 at 10:23 am
Straight forward and easy one. Thanks.
May 1, 2012 at 5:54 pm
According to the SQL 2012 Licensing and Data FAQ worksheet,
"*Note: SQL Server 2012 will continue to be available in Developer, Express and Compact editions. Web Edition will be offered in a Services Provider License Agreement (SPLA) model only. Datacenter Edition is being retired with all capabilities now available in Enterprise. Workgroup and Small business Editions are also being retired. "
This was the basis of my incorrect answer.
May 7, 2012 at 6:26 am
Good one, thanks!
May 8, 2012 at 2:05 am
oh lovely foot notes 🙂
it does not mention about the developer edition on the "Features Supported by the Editions of SQL Server 2012" http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc645993(v=SQL.110).aspx
thanks for the question
Iulian
May 17, 2012 at 8:01 pm
Good question. Thanks for submitting.
http://brittcluff.blogspot.com/
Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 24 (of 24 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply