March 21, 2017 at 9:10 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Launching Products
March 22, 2017 at 2:42 am
I've mentioned it many times before but I'll say it again.
Products now are released too often and often with little in them to justify the hassle and cost of getting the upgrade. Most releases have something nice in them but not enough to make a convincing argument. The release-time is too short.
We are getting new versions of SQL Server every 2 years (2005, 2008, 2008R2, 2012, 2014, 2016...). MS Office & Adobe products are no better.
I'd much rather that they made it every 4-5 years and made each release so compelling that upgrading seemed the natural thing to do, as it was with SQL Server 2005 or Office 2007.
March 22, 2017 at 6:03 am
I'm excited when SP2 of a product is released, since most of the obvious bugs are hopefully dealt with and other users have documented their experiences with the product. :laugh:
March 22, 2017 at 6:08 am
Sean Redmond - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 2:42 AMI've mentioned it many times before but I'll say it again.
Products now are released too often and often with little in them to justify the hassle and cost of getting the upgrade. Most releases have something nice in them but not enough to make a convincing argument. The release-time is too short.
We are getting new versions of SQL Server every 2 years (2005, 2008, 2008R2, 2012, 2014, 2016...). MS Office & Adobe products are no better.
I'd much rather that they made it every 4-5 years and made each release so compelling that upgrading seemed the natural thing to do, as it was with SQL Server 2005 or Office 2007.
I think some of this is down to the current pace of change in the computing world. With things like Agile and DevOps a company can release new / updated versions of a product far faster than in the past, adding in new features that the end-users want / need / desire in a much shorter time frame. Rather than waiting 3-4 years for the next "gotta have it" feature in SQL, now you can have it in a couple years. Of course, this then leads to a fear of upgrading, because what if that next version has the feature you want? Or you get stuck in an endless upgrade cycle, where just as you finish getting everything settled on SQL vX, you're told to start migrating to SQL vY which came out 3 months ago...
But that's in-office politics.
Now, Steve, one thing I do wish (and can understand why they may not) is for Red Gate to do more in-person SQL in the City events. I was able, several years back, to make it to the event in Chicago, and I would love to get to another one. I know there were several the year after, but because of various things I couldn't make them.
March 22, 2017 at 8:20 am
In the past I was able to attend several conferences, some of which involved a product launch. It was very exciting. During the presentations and testimonials from companies who had been in the beta testing programs, I was able to get ideas as to how something could be done. Later, when I could get my hands on the new product or version, I'd try it out for myself. It was very cool and I did get a chance to do things faster or better.
WOW, I miss those days.
Kindest Regards, Rod Connect with me on LinkedIn.
March 22, 2017 at 8:25 am
Sean Redmond - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 2:42 AMI've mentioned it many times before but I'll say it again.
Products now are released too often and often with little in them to justify the hassle and cost of getting the upgrade. Most releases have something nice in them but not enough to make a convincing argument. The release-time is too short.
We are getting new versions of SQL Server every 2 years (2005, 2008, 2008R2, 2012, 2014, 2016...). MS Office & Adobe products are no better.
I'd much rather that they made it every 4-5 years and made each release so compelling that upgrading seemed the natural thing to do, as it was with SQL Server 2005 or Office 2007.
Why? You don't have to upgrade every two years. You could skip every other version, get your four year upgrade, and get more features.
Releasing less often, means lots of work sits in development, no idea how useful it is, the flaws others might see, how much could be done to improve it and more. I like the idea of them releasing every 2 years. Get some features, make the upgrade decision. I'd probably go every 3 versions myself (or longer) for any particular instance.
March 22, 2017 at 8:27 am
jasona.work - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 6:08 AMNow, Steve, one thing I do wish (and can understand why they may not) is for Red Gate to do more in-person SQL in the City events. I was able, several years back, to make it to the event in Chicago, and I would love to get to another one. I know there were several the year after, but because of various things I couldn't make them.
Send a note. I like the in person events as well, though we've cut back due to the cost. I think if we go back to them, we need a way to charge admission, at least some token amount. The last few we did had lots of people register and not show up. Since we have to plan for most people to come, we end up losing quite a bit of money.
March 22, 2017 at 8:47 am
March 22, 2017 at 9:25 am
Sean Redmond - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:47 AMSJ» Why? You don't have to upgrade every two years. You could skip every other version, get your four year upgrade, and get more features.
Hi Steve,
You were lamenting in your editorial about the disappearance of big product launches. I think that the frequency and the size of the product launches are inversely related. Because there are only a few new features or improvements, it is harder to become as excited as you once did and you know that there will be another version in 2 years' time. With less buzz around them, it is not worth a company's while to spend big on a launch. Why rush to get the train when there will be another one in 10 minutes' time?
We skip 3 versions because there is rarely anything so good in a new release that convinces us to go through the hassle of upgrading. Microsoft's own marketing is no help.
However, onto your main point, I do feel pride when people can work more easily or do new things with things that I have created or was a part in creating.
Sean.
Thanks.
I can certainly understand the smaller buzz, and I'd agree. There's still some excitement. We aren't releasing in 10 minutes (not major launches), it's years. That's still significant work. It's even better to see something launched, and then have bug fixes come out more often than once a year in a Service Pack.
March 23, 2017 at 6:25 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:27 AMjasona.work - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 6:08 AMNow, Steve, one thing I do wish (and can understand why they may not) is for Red Gate to do more in-person SQL in the City events. I was able, several years back, to make it to the event in Chicago, and I would love to get to another one. I know there were several the year after, but because of various things I couldn't make them.Send a note. I like the in person events as well, though we've cut back due to the cost. I think if we go back to them, we need a way to charge admission, at least some token amount. The last few we did had lots of people register and not show up. Since we have to plan for most people to come, we end up losing quite a bit of money.
Perhaps, if for the fee the attendee got something for it on the day (e.g. it covers food and refreshments, USB key with info on or T-Shirt) then it would seem a reasonable deal. I am not even speculating whether the fee vs. item cost should equate or not. Perhaps the item cost could also be covered by sponsorship.
Of course, it could be argued that the event is of value anyway. :hehe:
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
March 23, 2017 at 6:31 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 9:25 AMSean Redmond - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:47 AMSJ» Why? You don't have to upgrade every two years. You could skip every other version, get your four year upgrade, and get more features.
Hi Steve,
You were lamenting in your editorial about the disappearance of big product launches. I think that the frequency and the size of the product launches are inversely related. Because there are only a few new features or improvements, it is harder to become as excited as you once did and you know that there will be another version in 2 years' time. With less buzz around them, it is not worth a company's while to spend big on a launch. Why rush to get the train when there will be another one in 10 minutes' time?
We skip 3 versions because there is rarely anything so good in a new release that convinces us to go through the hassle of upgrading. Microsoft's own marketing is no help.
However, onto your main point, I do feel pride when people can work more easily or do new things with things that I have created or was a part in creating.
Sean.Thanks.
I can certainly understand the smaller buzz, and I'd agree. There's still some excitement. We aren't releasing in 10 minutes (not major launches), it's years. That's still significant work. It's even better to see something launched, and then have bug fixes come out more often than once a year in a Service Pack.
Maybe the releases should be less frequent but the updates more so. If you have a product with 2010, 2015 and 2020 releases but updates on a different delivery frequency / continuous delivery then people can get really excited by all the features in one release over another yet can optionally be continuously updating that release. I don't think that what is happening to SQL Server is that much different. Perhaps the continuous delivery to Azure will come to SQL Server is such a manner.
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
March 23, 2017 at 10:53 am
Gary Varga - Thursday, March 23, 2017 6:25 AMPerhaps, if for the fee the attendee got something for it on the day (e.g. it covers food and refreshments, USB key with info on or T-Shirt) then it would seem a reasonable deal. I am not even speculating whether the fee vs. item cost should equate or not. Perhaps the item cost could also be covered by sponsorship.Of course, it could be argued that the event is of value anyway. :hehe:
We did charge in London and fed people, gave everyone something + prizes and content. We have some tax issues in the US that I hope we work out.
March 23, 2017 at 10:59 am
Gary Varga - Thursday, March 23, 2017 6:31 AMMaybe the releases should be less frequent but the updates more so. If you have a product with 2010, 2015 and 2020 releases but updates on a different delivery frequency / continuous delivery then people can get really excited by all the features in one release over another yet can optionally be continuously updating that release. I don't think that what is happening to SQL Server is that much different. Perhaps the continuous delivery to Azure will come to SQL Server is such a manner.
This used to happen. Then lots of people complained they didn't want features, only patches/fixes. That's where we are. From the MS perspective, to reduce the complexity of too many branches, as well as the reduction of inventory (unreleased features), they've gone to the release cycle of two years, or really 1 now with v.Next due to release this year.
What's the solution? No idea. Some want features, some want patches, some want both. The branch strategy to provide this is crazy. No matter what a vendor does, there are going to be complaints. Keep that in mind. Your choice does not apply to all environments. Releasing SQL Server is close to ordering pizza for 50million people. What toppings work?
March 23, 2017 at 12:45 pm
Gary Varga - Thursday, March 23, 2017 6:25 AMSteve Jones - SSC Editor - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:27 AMjasona.work - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 6:08 AMNow, Steve, one thing I do wish (and can understand why they may not) is for Red Gate to do more in-person SQL in the City events. I was able, several years back, to make it to the event in Chicago, and I would love to get to another one. I know there were several the year after, but because of various things I couldn't make them.Send a note. I like the in person events as well, though we've cut back due to the cost. I think if we go back to them, we need a way to charge admission, at least some token amount. The last few we did had lots of people register and not show up. Since we have to plan for most people to come, we end up losing quite a bit of money.
Perhaps, if for the fee the attendee got something for it on the day (e.g. it covers food and refreshments, USB key with info on or T-Shirt) then it would seem a reasonable deal. I am not even speculating whether the fee vs. item cost should equate or not. Perhaps the item cost could also be covered by sponsorship.
Of course, it could be argued that the event is of value anyway. :hehe:
For the Chicago event, they did hand out some goodies, a USB stick with the free Red Gate books, a little notebook with a tiny pen, and at the end of the event printed(!!) copies of some of the Red Gate books (limit one per person until everyone went by,) and I believe also t-shirts.
I've still got all my goodies from the event.
I know there was lunch at the venue, but I don't recall if it was included or not.
Regardless, for what I took away from the event (excluding the goodies) it would've been worth a $50-100 admission...
March 25, 2017 at 3:45 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor - Thursday, March 23, 2017 10:59 AMGary Varga - Thursday, March 23, 2017 6:31 AMMaybe the releases should be less frequent but the updates more so. If you have a product with 2010, 2015 and 2020 releases but updates on a different delivery frequency / continuous delivery then people can get really excited by all the features in one release over another yet can optionally be continuously updating that release. I don't think that what is happening to SQL Server is that much different. Perhaps the continuous delivery to Azure will come to SQL Server is such a manner.This used to happen. Then lots of people complained they didn't want features, only patches/fixes. That's where we are. From the MS perspective, to reduce the complexity of too many branches, as well as the reduction of inventory (unreleased features), they've gone to the release cycle of two years, or really 1 now with v.Next due to release this year.
What's the solution? No idea. Some want features, some want patches, some want both. The branch strategy to provide this is crazy. No matter what a vendor does, there are going to be complaints. Keep that in mind. Your choice does not apply to all environments. Releasing SQL Server is close to ordering pizza for 50million people. What toppings work?
Just not pineapple. It's wrong :Whistling:
Gaz
-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply