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 12»»

SQL Server 2008 Launch Date Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007 9:42 AM
SSCertifiable

SSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiableSSCertifiable

Group: Moderators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:03 AM
Points: 6,779, Visits: 1,866
Comments posted here are about the content posted at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/pressrelease/3096.asp

Andy
SQLAndy - My Blog!
Connect with me on LinkedIn
Follow me on Twitter
Post #380349
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007 10:28 AM


Say Hey Kid

Say Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey Kid

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:24 AM
Points: 685, Visits: 104
and I have hardly started using sql 2005


Everything you can imagine is real.

Post #380367
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:09 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, February 27, 2014 10:08 AM
Points: 48, Visits: 3,646

Same here. Why MS is releasing a new version when 2005 have not captured the industry.

 

Post #380546
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 2:18 AM
Valued Member

Valued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued Member

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 5:00 AM
Points: 52, Visits: 138

I've seen a report that companies in their droves are realising that Microsoft's Software Assurance doesn't represent any economic benefit unless there are more frequent product releases that at the same time offer tangible benefits and relevant new features.

Why would you need SA if you already bought into W2K3 and SQL2K5?  My view is that most people would be quite happy on that platform for the next 5-10 years.  This would mean a revenue stream for Microsoft drying up ... unless they can give people reasons to upgrade.  Witness the "rush" to roll out Vista .....

Post #380572
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 6:14 AM
SSC Journeyman

SSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC Journeyman

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, June 28, 2014 8:14 AM
Points: 89, Visits: 260

3 yearly releases is more or less the norm, as I understand it. That said, from Nov 2005 to Feb 2008 is actually only 2 1/2 years.

I believe from my reading so far that SQL 2008 will make the jump from SQL 2000 even more attractive, so perhaps the reason is that MS has found the uptake of SQL 2005 not strong enough, so they are trying to get SQl 2008 out to get people off of SQL 2000 (... and SQL 7). As I understand it, MS only support the current and previosu release, so when SQL 2008 is out, that will make SQL 2005 and SQL 2008 the 2 'supported' releases.

 

 

Post #380633
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 7:30 AM
SSC-Addicted

SSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-AddictedSSC-Addicted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 3:38 AM
Points: 445, Visits: 82

How many of us grumbled about the five year period between the release of 2000 and 2005? Now we have a 2.5-3 year release cycle and some people still complain.




Post #380675
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 8:13 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 10:26 AM
Points: 891, Visits: 1,958
Wow. I was expecting 3rd quarter for SQL 2008. I've got a server migration and upgrade from 2000 Standard to Enterprise and I was considering taking it to 2005, I think I'll wait. 2000 is doing just fine for us for now.

Fortunately I didn't start buying SQL 2005 books yet!
Post #380707
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 8:39 AM


SSC-Dedicated

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

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 4:10 PM
Points: 33,095, Visits: 15,202
I think the complainers were those looking for new features, like .NET or SSIS, and it was a long time to wait.

Personally I liked the 5 year time frame and I'd recommend upgrading those 2000 servers to 2008 and then waiting for 2014 instead of 2011







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #380725
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 10:36 AM
SSC-Enthusiastic

SSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-EnthusiasticSSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, June 8, 2013 9:40 AM
Points: 142, Visits: 286
This ought to be the biggest and buggiest microsoft release so far!
Post #380790
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 11:44 AM
Say Hey Kid

Say Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey KidSay Hey Kid

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 11:18 AM
Points: 676, Visits: 432
I'll beleive the release date when I actually see it come to pass. I don't think I've seen MSFT hit an initial release date yet =) I could be wrong.


Post #380818
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 12»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse