﻿<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><channel><title>SQLServerCentral / Editorials / SQLServerCentral.com  / The Redmond Agenda / Latest Posts</title><generator>InstantForum.NET v2.9.0</generator><description>SQLServerCentral</description><link>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/</link><webMaster>notifications@sqlservercentral.com</webMaster><lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 06:14:08 GMT</lastBuildDate><ttl>20</ttl><item><title>RE: The Redmond Agenda</title><link>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1317038-263-1.aspx</link><description>[quote][b]jeff.mason (6/22/2012)[/b][hr]I still have seen nothing to convince me that regulatory requirements like HIPAA, SOX, FDA validation, et al can be safely supported in an external cloud.  Internal, maybe, but how can a DBA guarantee data protection at that level when someone else owns and maintains the servers?[/quote]The third party vendor has to support those same regulatory requirements.  If they aren't cretified under the necessary authorities, you don't use them.</description><pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:14:02 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Lynn Pettis</dc:creator></item><item><title>RE: The Redmond Agenda</title><link>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1317038-263-1.aspx</link><description>I still have seen nothing to convince me that regulatory requirements like HIPAA, SOX, FDA validation, et al can be safely supported in an external cloud.  Internal, maybe, but how can a DBA guarantee data protection at that level when someone else owns and maintains the servers?</description><pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:58:05 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>jeff.mason</dc:creator></item><item><title>RE: The Redmond Agenda</title><link>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1317038-263-1.aspx</link><description>[quote][b]cfradenburg (6/20/2012)[/b][hr]This could actually make RTM releases more solid.  With the cloud users working out a number of the bugs we may see less patching necessary on boxes we host.[/quote]That would be a great thing if it happened that way.There are some things that work well in the cloud and I still hold my reservations about moving to the cloud.</description><pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:34:39 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>SQLRNNR</dc:creator></item><item><title>RE: The Redmond Agenda</title><link>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1317038-263-1.aspx</link><description>This could actually make RTM releases more solid.  With the cloud users working out a number of the bugs we may see less patching necessary on boxes we host.</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:22:37 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>cfradenburg</dc:creator></item><item><title>RE: The Redmond Agenda</title><link>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1317038-263-1.aspx</link><description>[quote]It talks about five things Redmond doesn't want you to know, and the first item is that the cloud is first. New releases of products will likely come in the cloud first, and in a version you can buy second. The article mentions Sharepoint, but many other Microsoft products live in the cloud, including SQL Server.Is that a bad thing?[/quote]Depends on what new features / functionality that is included I would say. If it's something you really want then it can be annoying. I however fear that support for non cloud based solutions will become worse because of the cloud focus. Hopefully this fear is not warranted.</description><pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2012 00:11:59 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>IceDread</dc:creator></item><item><title>The Redmond Agenda</title><link>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1317038-263-1.aspx</link><description>Comments posted to this topic are about the item [B]&lt;A HREF="/articles/Editorial/91375/"&gt;The Redmond Agenda&lt;/A&gt;[/B]</description><pubDate>Sun, 17 Jun 2012 04:42:22 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Steve Jones - SSC Editor</dc:creator></item></channel></rss>