Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase «««45678»»

Effectiveness Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 4:34 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:49 AM
Points: 331, Visits: 350
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.
Post #1513800
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 6:47 AM


SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:21 AM
Points: 1,793, Visits: 5,044
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.
Post #1513854
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 7:15 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:49 AM
Points: 331, Visits: 350
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...
Post #1513880
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:18 AM


UDP Broadcaster

UDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP BroadcasterUDP Broadcaster

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:13 AM
Points: 1,460, Visits: 1,890
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.
Post #1513915
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:27 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:49 AM
Points: 331, Visits: 350
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...
Post #1513920
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:29 AM


SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 11:58 AM
Points: 5,819, Visits: 3,739
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!!!
Post #1513921
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:51 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:49 AM
Points: 331, Visits: 350
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.
Post #1513934
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 9:16 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 3:13 PM
Points: 393, Visits: 2,684
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.

Post #1513944
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 9:18 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 1:28 PM
Points: 31,368, Visits: 15,836
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.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1513946
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2013 9:39 AM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:49 AM
Points: 331, Visits: 350
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?'
Post #1513955
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««45678»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse