Looking to 2014

  • Comments posted to this topic are about the item Looking to 2014

  • I think that the RT ideal is great...as an ideal. I think that experience shows that being able to reuse components (in some form - that is a interesting and in depth technical discussion right there) is key.

    Looking forward, I think that the "Metro" UI doesn't sit well in the enterprise. Perhaps there are aspects of it that could be viable but it doesn't sit well with data entry apps, office apps and most administrative apps like timesheet apps. I have yet to see an example of a UI that uses the Win 8 app UI that would bring any of this to the desktop of the average office working (I am not even considering IT roles either).

    I too cannot see the next buzz in data (except a continuation or refinement of those from 2013).

    HNY!!!

    Gaz

    -- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!

  • It will be interesting to see what the XP marketshare is once Microsoft fully desupports it in 2014. Then, if a flaw is found how bad will it be exploited since Microsoft will not patch it.... Right now XP marketshare is still over 25%. We still have some XP PCs here.. not many but a few to support apps that do not support Win7.

  • 2014:

    Almost all of our clients are on Windows 7 and SQL Server 2008R2. Don't see that changing much.

    More OSS in the form of scripting, DVCS and data tools is coming.

  • SQL Server 2014 In-Memory-OLTP Tables do not support identity columns or foreign keys, so that puts them well outside what I would be willing to accept for a normal application.

    They seem more like a marketing ploy, like federated databases, that were good for TCP benchmarks, but no one will use in the real world.

    They might be useful for a very small number of "special needs" applications.

  • Michael Valentine Jones (1/2/2014)


    SQL Server 2014 In-Memory-OLTP Tables do not support identity columns or foreign keys, so that puts them well outside what I would be willing to accept for a normal application.

    They seem more like a marketing ploy, like federated databases, that were good for TCP benchmarks, but no one will use in the real world.

    They might be useful for a very small number of "special needs" applications.

    Wow... I did not know that. That will limit it's use.

  • Markus (1/2/2014)


    Michael Valentine Jones (1/2/2014)


    SQL Server 2014 In-Memory-OLTP Tables do not support identity columns or foreign keys, so that puts them well outside what I would be willing to accept for a normal application.

    They seem more like a marketing ploy, like federated databases, that were good for TCP benchmarks, but no one will use in the real world.

    They might be useful for a very small number of "special needs" applications.

    Wow... I did not know that. That will limit it's use.

    There are a number of other useful features that are not supported:

    check constraints, unique constraints, triggers, full-text indexes, updates to primary key columns, truncate table, alter table, create index, drop index, alter index, filtered indexes, nullable columns, etc.

    Transact-SQL Constructs Not Supported by In-Memory OLTP

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn246937(v=sql.120).aspx

  • I so hope you are right about Microsoft abandoning RT and Metro on the desktop. It is the worst idea in computing since the hammer. (Think about it.)

    While I "use" Windows 8 at home, I have installed Linux for dual boot, and threaten to get rid of Windows about every other day. I truly believe that MS is going to see significant revenue loss, and possibly push more people to develop desktop apps on Linux targeted to specific business types. Today, most business Linux usage is on the server side. W8 may be the OS that kills MS's monopoly in business.

    Dave

  • Markus (1/2/2014)


    It will be interesting to see what the XP marketshare is once Microsoft fully desupports it in 2014. Then, if a flaw is found how bad will it be exploited since Microsoft will not patch it.... Right now XP marketshare is still over 25%. We still have some XP PCs here.. not many but a few to support apps that do not support Win7.

    Back around November 2012 MS announced that Windows 8 was outselling Windows 7 by huge amounts. Around the end of December they admitted they lied. W8 was doing WORSE than Vista.

    I mention that because I do not believe for one second that XP has only 25% of the Windows desktop market. I believe it is far higher than 50% in business, although on personal computers that may not be the case. Most companies buy PCs and then downgrade to XP due to an awful lot of software not running on Windows 7 yet.

    I may very well be wrong on my estimates, but I stand by my point that I do not trust MS any longer when it comes to claims about market share.

    As an example from healthcare, very few of the products sold to us will run on Windows 7. Most require IE 7 or 8 at the best. Healthcare software vendors are spending money chasing moving regulations from the feds, and do not have time nor resources to spend updating software for Windows 7. A lot are pushing to do that now that XP is losing support - but they are behind. The same goes for SQL, most of my products supported SQL 2000 only when SQL 2008 was released. About 2009 or 2010 they started supporting SQL 2005. This is only one industry, but a lot of people I talk to are still running very old software that won't run under Windows 7.

    Dave

  • djackson 22568 (1/2/2014)


    Markus (1/2/2014)


    It will be interesting to see what the XP marketshare is once Microsoft fully desupports it in 2014. Then, if a flaw is found how bad will it be exploited since Microsoft will not patch it.... Right now XP marketshare is still over 25%. We still have some XP PCs here.. not many but a few to support apps that do not support Win7.

    Back around November 2012 MS announced that Windows 8 was outselling Windows 7 by huge amounts. Around the end of December they admitted they lied. W8 was doing WORSE than Vista.

    I mention that because I do not believe for one second that XP has only 25% of the Windows desktop market. I believe it is far higher than 50% in business, although on personal computers that may not be the case. Most companies buy PCs and then downgrade to XP due to an awful lot of software not running on Windows 7 yet.

    I may very well be wrong on my estimates, but I stand by my point that I do not trust MS any longer when it comes to claims about market share.

    As an example from healthcare, very few of the products sold to us will run on Windows 7. Most require IE 7 or 8 at the best. Healthcare software vendors are spending money chasing moving regulations from the feds, and do not have time nor resources to spend updating software for Windows 7. A lot are pushing to do that now that XP is losing support - but they are behind. The same goes for SQL, most of my products supported SQL 2000 only when SQL 2008 was released. About 2009 or 2010 they started supporting SQL 2005. This is only one industry, but a lot of people I talk to are still running very old software that won't run under Windows 7.

    Oh I don't know.... I'd say the percentages are probably on target. From the IT folks I check with most companies are just about rid of XP now with a few still on legacy systems like two systems here. We have a handful still on XP for that reason. Other than that all Win7. I see us sticking with Win7 for a long time like we did with XP.

  • Markus (1/2/2014)


    djackson 22568 (1/2/2014)


    Markus (1/2/2014)


    It will be interesting to see what the XP marketshare is once Microsoft fully desupports it in 2014. Then, if a flaw is found how bad will it be exploited since Microsoft will not patch it.... Right now XP marketshare is still over 25%. We still have some XP PCs here.. not many but a few to support apps that do not support Win7.

    Back around November 2012 MS announced that Windows 8 was outselling Windows 7 by huge amounts. Around the end of December they admitted they lied. W8 was doing WORSE than Vista.

    I mention that because I do not believe for one second that XP has only 25% of the Windows desktop market. I believe it is far higher than 50% in business, although on personal computers that may not be the case. Most companies buy PCs and then downgrade to XP due to an awful lot of software not running on Windows 7 yet.

    I may very well be wrong on my estimates, but I stand by my point that I do not trust MS any longer when it comes to claims about market share.

    As an example from healthcare, very few of the products sold to us will run on Windows 7. Most require IE 7 or 8 at the best. Healthcare software vendors are spending money chasing moving regulations from the feds, and do not have time nor resources to spend updating software for Windows 7. A lot are pushing to do that now that XP is losing support - but they are behind. The same goes for SQL, most of my products supported SQL 2000 only when SQL 2008 was released. About 2009 or 2010 they started supporting SQL 2005. This is only one industry, but a lot of people I talk to are still running very old software that won't run under Windows 7.

    We budgeted a significant amount to replace half of our PCs last year, or to upgrade to W7. Due to various issues we still have well over 75% of our PCs on Windows XP SP3 or earlier! Not all of this is due to vendor issues - some is poor project management.

    I don't think we are unique, nor do I think your situation is unique. The question is where most companies fall. The economy, software support, and a lot of other issues make this a difficult transition.

    Oh I don't know.... I'd say the percentages are probably on target. From the IT folks I check with most companies are just about rid of XP now with a few still on legacy systems like two systems here. We have a handful still on XP for that reason. Other than that all Win7. I see us sticking with Win7 for a long time like we did with XP.

    Dave

  • Oh I agree... I agree.... Your results may vary... no doubt...

    I just because the folks at companies I know are just about off of or totally off of XP doesn't mean that is the case everywhere...

  • "In the rest of the data world,..."

    I think the data world outside of the physical database is starting to mature, driven by governance which will be driven regulatory oversight. In many companies this is likely to push down through architecture and will put severe pressure on the DBA function - who after all is seen as the the dude who 'knows' what's going on in the databases and is the technology common end point.

    ACID may no longer be enough when you have to prove wider data quality, provenance and ownership to mention a few things. Impenetrable SSIS jobs might be a big problem for trace-ability.

    The evolving issues will include getting dragged into "how did we/how do we" conversations around "hey, how have we ended up with customer data spread across all these databases ?"

    So all those issues about projects/designers/developers doing their own thing 'because it's quicker/easier/cheaper' will start coming home to roost.

    Standards: "Eh, what do you mean we have 30 glossaries, no common definitions, data dictionaries or data models?"

  • g.brennan (1/3/2014)


    "In the rest of the data world,..."

    I think the data world outside of the physical database is starting to mature, driven by governance which will be driven regulatory oversight. In many companies this is likely to push down through architecture and will put severe pressure on the DBA function - who after all is seen as the the dude who 'knows' what's going on in the databases and is the technology common end point.

    ACID may no longer be enough when you have to prove wider data quality, provenance and ownership to mention a few things. Impenetrable SSIS jobs might be a big problem for trace-ability.

    The evolving issues will include getting dragged into "how did we/how do we" conversations around "hey, how have we ended up with customer data spread across all these databases ?"

    So all those issues about projects/designers/developers doing their own thing 'because it's quicker/easier/cheaper' will start coming home to roost.

    Standards: "Eh, what do you mean we have 30 glossaries, no common definitions, data dictionaries or data models?"

    Ah!!! One of my (many) pet hates...the appplication of no process under the guise of agile!!!

    Gaz

    -- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!

  • Hi Steve,

    Like you I see the two major items you mentioned as the big ones. With the need for bigger better faster driving our online transaction lives it should be the main focus. This will not complete the migration away from spinning disk technology but will be an operational step that has sat on the conceptual lab server for too long. We have been making inroads to these technologies and it is time they became real for the masses.

    But more along the line of NoSql and the world of data. I have been looking into the use of Predictive Coding as part of eDiscovery over the past month and how it is in the process of restructuring both the Federal Rules of Civil Proceedings and the case law concerning Discovery. With a better understanding now where this could all go, there is a tremendous potential no only in the legal realm but also in the general "need to know" for those experts who mine data. Using the computer automated searching algorithms and the artificial intelligence that appears to be inside the truly integrated toolsets available or being developed, this emerging technology could restructure how we think and deal with data and specifically Big Data.

    With this in mind I am in complete agreement about NoSQL and other data products. Further I hope that Microsoft will some how address this area by developing some new interface or options to include SQL Server and SharePoint data collections in the discussion of eDiscovery using a combination of Microsoft and non-Microsoft products. Lastly, knowing Microsoft's history of cloning their products that were never intended to do something into a "new" product that is great and free, I hope that if Microsoft enters the field of Predictive Coding that they either write one from scratch, or buy an existing product and incorporate it into the MS family.

    Thanks

    M.

    Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 24 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply