Anyone else HOT with how Red-Gate rolled out SQLHISTORY?

  • If you recently upgrade SQL Prompt to a recent version that has SQL History you were in for a rude surprise.  RG (Red-Gate) didn't simply add a new feature named SQL History to SQL Prompt, they replaced the  Tab History feature with SQL History and it is a really bad feature. The RG user forums are very active with angry customers about this.

    I understand the complexities of software design; I've created a small app myself in Visual Studio so I get the difficulties that can arise from some new app. What bites my arse about this isn't that SQL History is awful and  not ready for prime time  but that RG opted to replace a beloved and functional feature with one that wasn't and NOT only did they not offer users the option of replacing Tab History they didn't even mention in the release notes that SQL History was going to replace; at least that's what one user reported on the RG user forums.

    I love RG products and this one fiasco isn't going to chase me away but it does concern  me because it's 3 levels of failure. The first is releasing a clearly not ready for use feature. The second is having this new feature REPLACE an existing one that does work. The third and last is not mentioning in the documentation (i.e. release notes) that this is how SQL History would be implemented.

    I feel bad for the front line/tier1 support people at RG who are having to deal with angry customers, customers who often don't care that the person they are dealing with wasn't the one who caused this fiasco but an executive who can hide behind the frontline employees.

    What are your thoughts and keep in mind this is a pay to use product and not something free? Is it OK that RG choose to over-write an existing functional feature with a re-worked/over-hauled and very different new feature in instead of adding it to the product and letting users decide which they wanted to use?  How would you have handled this roll-out if it was your call to make? Should the person at RG who is the top person responsible for this kind of update be the one who apologizes to the customer base instead of hiding behind others?

    Kindest Regards,

    Just say No to Facebook!
  • Thanks for posting your issue and hopefully someone will answer soon.

    This is an automated bump to increase visibility of your question.

  • As far as I'm concerned, SQL History works much the same way Tab history used to except that it's much more flexible and easy to use. I really don't see the problem (and, no, I don't work for Redgate).

  • The SQL Prompt User forums are filled with unhappy users.  You're the first person I've seen say it's better.  I tried SQL History and it was incredibly slow and not useful where as Tab history is almost as quick as I can type.  That said when you are going to rollout what is effectively an overhaul of a feature you really should launch it as a separate feature and let the clients decide which one they prefer.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  YSLGuru.

    Kindest Regards,

    Just say No to Facebook!
  • After getting a lot of heat from angry customers RG did make a formal posting about the issue acknowledging the problems with SQL History and said they're working on it.  Most just uninstalled it and re-installed the last version of SQL Prompt that did not feature SQL History.

    Kindest Regards,

    Just say No to Facebook!

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

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