This project I began writing about in late January, the prototyping of a large database project using the latest versions of a Microsoft software stack, has been an unusual exercise. Unusual because, from the start, both the executive and the technical personnel were fully co-operative throughout the entire undertaking. The …
As a DB admin/developer I really appreciate the series. Even if I haven't read it all yet it will be a handy resource to pick at in the future.
If you happy and you know it, clunk your chains.
Uh, "all new"?
I'd hardly describe the latest versions of mature software products like Visual Studio and SQL Server as "all new". If your company had decided to go open-source and move to something like PostgreSQL (which also has spatial data types, IIRC) and switch to Java using NetBeans or Eclipse, then that would have been interesting. Or even if you were switching from old VB6 to .NET, that would have qualified as "new". But this? Meh...
Some people say the same thing about Vista but reality is different. Getting the new Visual Studio on XP was a big mistake for a friend of mine. It trashed his system and he had to start all over again. What should have been a 5 minute compile became a two day ordeal.
What have the romans done for us...
Apart from the ...
'I just wish [MS] would then put one tenth of the same effort into making the sites, the downloads and the installations usable'
'As it is you find yourself enmeshed in a Kafkaesque nightmare of: go here and download this, add this patch, and read these installation instructions - which are almost but not exactly like the instructions you downloaded the night before.'
'And if all of this sounds bad, remember that this is only the downloaded - installation is yet to come'
In three days I went back to bare metal five times before everything was present and correct.'
'This is not made at all clear on the CTP sites. Note that I'm not asking whether the information is there or not - I admit I didn't check every folder in every basement. It's doubtless there somewhere, but are these fundamental requirements stated clearly at the start of the download or installation instructions? No.'
'if you can't find your way through the maze, round the sleeping dragon and past Cerberus then you are not worthy. Having actually installed the stack and got it working, I feel that I deserve a T-shirt that says: "I survived the 2008 install, even if my sanity didn't".'
Unfortunately it looks like the author has suddenly decided to downgrade all the massive problems and start singing the praises.
Therefore, I agree that thet credibility is now zero and I wouldn't trust his final comments at all.
What have the Kevins done for us.....
"Unfortunately it looks like the author has suddenly decided to downgrade all the massive problems and start singing the praises."
This seems an unreasonable comment to me.
Mark has told us the good and the bad. This is what I wanted to hear - the story warts and all. Having followed it all the way through the overall impression I have gained is that it went well and that's what the summary tells us.
His only major complaint is about the CTP program. And, in fact, the only link Mark includes in the summary is one to the comments on the CTP program, so how can he possibly be accused of downgrading those comments?
A summary should summarise - that's what this one did.
- Xmas Round-up Ten top tech toys to interface with a techie’s Christmas stocking
- Xmas Round-up Ghosts of Christmas Past: Ten tech treats from yesteryear
- Review Hey Linux newbie: If you've never had a taste, try perfect Petra ... mmm, smells like Mint 16
- Analysis Microsoft's licence riddles give Linux and pals a free ride to virtual domination
- NSFW Oz couple get jiggy in pharmacy in 'banned' condom ad