June 10, 2013 at 3:54 am
After visiting TechEd, I'm more and more convinced, the damn is going to break and we'll see tons of people using Azure, or, Microsoft is going to fold up and go away. There no longer feels like the possibility of a middle ground. They're just too committed to it. As such, I'm going to keep going with my pursuit of Azure knowledge, but I can't see a lot of people doing the same thing.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
June 10, 2013 at 6:24 am
and SQL2008 RTM will be discontinued?:w00t:
June 10, 2013 at 6:48 am
“there is no such thing as a SQL Server team anymore. There is, in fact, no code base called SQL Server. There’s only one code base, which is the Azure database code base.”
Great way to alienate all the companies that haven't bought into the "cloud" PR. Plus all the smaller companies that are wary of the increased prices and pace of change with the increase of versions. Training is already becoming increasingly difficult.
Also after this last weeks revelations concerning data privacy and the NSA, whom will desire to use hosted Azure? Half the questions I answered at a Saturday meeting were concerning PKI and OSS security. These were from business people that couldn't spell PGP a week ago.
June 10, 2013 at 6:53 am
I suspect that the versioning will have to do with CALs and how most folks license the products:
- Windows Server requires CALs to licenses, and as I understand it, a Windows Server 2012 CAL will include Windows Server 2012 and 2012 R2. No need for further investment on the CALs side. In addition, Windows Servers don't manage data the way that SQL Server does - a file on Windows Server 2012 R2 or Windows Server 2013 is essentially the same (there may be some meta-data differences in the underlying OS, but it's still the same file).
- Same scenario for System Center.
- SQL Server is often licensed per Core (or groups of 2 cores, min 2 groups...). I think the issue Steve brought up (attempting to restore 2008R2 databases to 2008, pathces, etc.) will reduce confusion.
All of these companies who have invested in Windows Server CALs (even my small company of 300-ish employees) would balk at having to repurchase a new set of CALs - that we just purchased 6 months ago... (that's a $10k outlay, and we have to have 1 per employee, since our timekeeping system and employee portal run on Windows...)
Just my 2¢.
Jim
June 10, 2013 at 7:21 am
SQL2014... wow.... still haven't even looked at SQL2012... still trying to get everything upgraded to 2008.....
June 10, 2013 at 7:25 am
Maybe Windows 95 was a good name for a product at the time but other than that I'm no fan of using a year as part of a name. As far as the cloud goes, I have no interest in keeping my data there.
Cheers
June 10, 2013 at 7:36 am
jfogel (6/10/2013)
Maybe Windows 95 was a good name for a product at the time but other than that I'm no fan of using a year as part of a name. As far as the cloud goes, I have no interest in keeping my data there.
I wonder if it is a mindset... to get you to think your version is OLD.... LOL..... SQL Server 2008 sounds quite old because of the name doesn't it? It is tied to the year and your mind makes you date it eventhough it was released towards the end of 2008 and not Jan 1st....
June 10, 2013 at 7:57 am
Oh, those of us who just finished our 2012 certifications are looking forward to this.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 10, 2013 at 8:03 am
Grant Fritchey (6/10/2013)
After visiting TechEd, I'm more and more convinced, the damn is going to break and we'll see tons of people using Azure, or, Microsoft is going to fold up and go away. There no longer feels like the possibility of a middle ground. They're just too committed to it. As such, I'm going to keep going with my pursuit of Azure knowledge, but I can't see a lot of people doing the same thing.
What do you think is going to happen to businesses that feel they can't commit to the cloud for privacy reasons? Is there a data model for them at Microsoft, or are they going to have to rely on outdated product support for a while and then switch to another vendor entirely?
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
June 10, 2013 at 8:28 am
jcrawf02 (6/10/2013)
Grant Fritchey (6/10/2013)
After visiting TechEd, I'm more and more convinced, the damn is going to break and we'll see tons of people using Azure, or, Microsoft is going to fold up and go away. There no longer feels like the possibility of a middle ground. They're just too committed to it. As such, I'm going to keep going with my pursuit of Azure knowledge, but I can't see a lot of people doing the same thing.What do you think is going to happen to businesses that feel they can't commit to the cloud for privacy reasons? Is there a data model for them at Microsoft, or are they going to have to rely on outdated product support for a while and then switch to another vendor entirely?
My understanding that that the SQL Azure branch is being folded back into the SQL Server codebase, and going forward the same release of SQL Server / Azure will support intallation in a hosted cloud, a private cloud, or even on bare metal similar to what we've always had. Does anyone know different?
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 10, 2013 at 8:38 am
Seed Vicious (6/10/2013)
and SQL2008 RTM will be discontinued?:w00t:
Support will wane next year. However given that in April 2014 this will be 5 years old, that's expected.
June 10, 2013 at 8:40 am
Eric M Russell (6/10/2013)
My understanding that that the SQL Azure branch is being folded back into the SQL Server codebase, and going forward the same release of SQL Server / Azure will support intallation in a hosted cloud, a private cloud, or even on bare metal similar to what we've always had. Does anyone know different?
My understanding is the reverse. The Azure codebase was a branch, but it's become the mainline, with the box product being a branch. Things happen in Azure first (even as they're catching up with some features) and they may or may not get into the boxed product.
June 10, 2013 at 9:14 am
What do you think is going to happen to businesses that feel they can't commit to the cloud for privacy reasons? Is there a data model for them at Microsoft, or are they going to have to rely on outdated product support for a while and then switch to another vendor entirely?
People reject public "clouds" for very good reasons.
As for the rapid re-versions (cha-ching!) in the MS product line: The ones that aren't fully committed to the MS stack, will find alternatives if they can afford to switch. There's a whole new generation of developers with OSS that are much more aggressive in pursuing clients.
Most companies are committed to the MS stack and can't convert due to years of legacy code, processes, training etc... Redmond can lead them onwards forcing changes year after year, even if it doesn't make business sense.
Basically it's a bow toward Mecca moment...
As for Azure leading the "box" version of the software, they have a lot of issues to fix in Azure before the veteran DBAs and developers outside of the "cloud" hype zone trust Azure.
June 10, 2013 at 10:05 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (6/10/2013)
Eric M Russell (6/10/2013)
My understanding that that the SQL Azure branch is being folded back into the SQL Server codebase, and going forward the same release of SQL Server / Azure will support installation in a hosted cloud, a private cloud, or even on bare metal similar to what we've always had. Does anyone know different?My understanding is the reverse. The Azure codebase was a branch, but it's become the mainline, with the box product being a branch. Things happen in Azure first (even as they're catching up with some features) and they may or may not get into the boxed product.
My read is that at one time Microsoft added a second product to SQL Server embedding into the codebase all the additional functionality that is Azure. The code was homogenous with many shared components and functions. in the original set the emphasis was in the main money making product SQL Server and it remained in that focus until Microsoft determined the profitability of Azure.
If Microsoft "follows the money" as we all believe it does, when the possibility of Azure being profitable became more of a reality, more development and emphasis was put on the additional product, Azure, incrementally. The revelation now is that Azure appears to be the coming "cash cow" and Microsoft bet at least a large part of the farm on that probability. As such they are realigning the code base to not be SQL with Azure appended into it, but Azure first and foremost, and SQL as part of the Azure solution set.
M.
Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 42 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply