digg

Somebody at MS just got fired. How do you not test one of your most used corporate products before releasing the corporate version of Vista?!

This is a non-story no company considering Oracle or IBM’s products would run an enterprise class product on a desktop OS which is what Vista is. Even going to the point of running SQL Express for development is a stretch. Those developers that are pushing the envelope and using Vista as a platform I am sure would be capable of acquiring the beta of Service Pack 2 for SQL Express. If SQL 2005 did not work with Windows Sever 2007 that would be a story, but not working with a yet unreleased desktop OS is a non-story.

well, nobody says they have to use SQL server. Plenty of other options.

And if they use an SQL-management module that handles communication with the backend (whatever SQL type of server they use), there's no problem at all.

i don't get what's the big deal. MS will release an update version of SQL Server that will work with Vista. Vista hasn't even been released for God sake
People should stop bitching.

The report is that it won't run SQL Server 2005 Express, which is the desktop counterpart of SQL Server. Still a bad mistake, but not as earth shaking as the article title suggests.

Guys, this is sensationalist news. Vista is the successor of Windows XP, a desktop OS for end-users. Windows 2003 is the current server OS where SQL Server, et al. are intended to be ran. This article is similar to saying "omg I can't watch DVDs on my web server"...

SP2 is compatible. (SP1 works for the most part, except for sometimes you get weird permission errors, probably from Vista's file system permissions.)

There is a CTP of SP2 out now. The final version of it should be out soon enough. This is really not a big deal.

The whole point of running MSDE (or SQL express) on a workstation os is for proof of concept and to test before moving the db to SQL, so why would one care if its on Vista, why not just run it on XP. Your testing the app NOT the os. Why would a company run a production db on a desktop os, thats just silly. (and asking for major problems). Does anyone really think that some engineer out there is saying to them selves, darn...I really wanted to install msde on Vista to test this app. Less then 30 days after they release vista to businesses. Most companies, and the one I work for, have dev SQL and test SQL boxes for just that purpose. This article is just FUD. By the time developers really want to test with Vista, MS will have everything fixed.

Vista was a pretty big change. I'm sure Microsoft anticipated things like this.

SQL express is a free desktop db for development, mostly for hobbiest, this is a non-story.

This is just a very thinly veiled venomous jab at Microsoft over what is essentially nothing. Go look at the author's other articles on CNN, yeah, he's got no bias.

How the hell is this news? Who in their right mind would run SQL Server on a desktop for anything but playing around? We could roll out Vista today with absolutely no problems if we wanted to.

lame.

Big freaking deal. Vista is a steaming pile of zune anyway.

and this is news because everyone is surprised?
move on... there are plenty of Os's to choose from.

I can definitely say this article is *****. I run Vista and SQL Server 2005 to do local development and testing.

More BS to try and badmouth Microsoft.

I am running Vista RTM, and SQL Express SP1 had permission problems but with SP2 Beta it works perfectly fine. No need to cry! ;p

I was going to run SQL on 50 distributed Vista Home Basic computers. NOW WHAT WILL I DO?

This story would be interesting... if it wasn't COMPLETELY WRONG. I'm running SQL Server Express on the Vista RTM right now, and as far as I can tell it works fine!

This is such a load of bullcrap that it's not even worth reading.

Wow, I never expected such an inaccurate story from CNN. Sure it doesn't work. It wasn't ever meant to work. The Vista Release is strictly desktop, not server. Does everyone forget that is how MS has done this in the last three major releases? Why is it such a surprise now? Why does CNN scream the sky is falling when what they are saying doesn't fit the bill? Dig me down, but this is wildly inaccurate.

Sweet Jebus, people. What a non-story. Doesn't anybody remember that Windows XP and 2003 Servers didn't work with SQL 2000 when the OS's were released? There was a quick patch, and all was well. You didn't see Microsoft die then, did you?

The title and general theme of the article is very misleading. SQL Server 2005 Express Edition is a very small piece of the overall SQL Server offering.

FUD

My email to the editor:

"...Vista, its long-awaited update to the Windows operating system, can't run the current version of SQL Server. The company is working on a SQL upgrade that is compatible with Vista - called SQL Server 2005 Express Service Pack 2 - but it's in beta and can be licensed only for testing purposes. Microsoft hasn't set a release date for the new SQL program."

This is misleading. Saying 'Vista will not run SQL Server' but actually referring to the knocked down desktop version called 'SQL Server Express SP2' is like saying that Sony's Playstation will not run HD video, but then later saying that when saying 'Playstation' really what is referred to is Playstation Portable and moaning that people have pointed that out.

'SQL Server' is a very specific product. It is designed to run on Microsoft's server platform, not it's desktop OS. SQL Server Express SP2 is a desktop product that precisely zero organisations will be relying on for mission critical data. Do you really need anyone to point out the solution that will be employed by developers who do need to run it? It's called 'not upgrading to Vista yet'.

"So companies looking to install Vista, which went on sale to corporate customers Nov. 30, are going to have to get their database management software someplace else."

Again, misleading. Serious database software runs on server operating systems. Vista is a desktop OS. Also it runs Microsoft Access just fine.

"(Before any more of you fire off an outraged e-mail informing me that Vista doesn't run SQL Server, go back and read the above paragraphs again: I'm talking about SQL Server 2005 Express, which is the desktop counterpart of SQL Server - not the server version.)"

So why did you say "SQL Server"? I guess we know the answer to that - because "Vista will not run SQL Server Express Service Pack 2 ... yet" does not sound as sensational does it?

Deceptive article... it's SQL Server Express... big difference, and probably worth noting in the summary.

This is quite a non-issue for two reasons:

1) Microsoft will enjoy upgrade revenue for the idiots who chose SQL Server in the first place and are now stuck with it

2) They are a monopoly, so people will buy Vista almost no matter how badly it sucks.

"No wonder Google (Charts) is beating Microsoft in other arenas: This is a company that has forgotten how to execute its own playbook of launching a coordinated wave of products that all work together."

totally agreeable

Not an oversight or error. They knew about the issue but had to accept it and deal with it the best they could in the name of progress. In the real world this will be a non-issue anyway but it does make a good sound bite for a journalist looking to provide some shock value.

Ah, FUD at it's best.

First of all, SQL Server doesn't run on XP either. You can run the developer edition, or MSDE of course, or SQL Server Express... but not Enterprise. It's built into the software to prevent that.

Second, SQL Server 2005 Express was initially incompatible with Vista BEFORE IT WAS RELEASED, but SP1 fixes the issue. Vista even tells you this when you install it.

I'm running SQL Server 2005 Express on Vista as I'm typing this and it works fine.

Seems to me that people are terrified that Vista is actually a great OS and that their pet OS (Linux, Mac OS, whatever) is going to become even more marginalized than it already is... so they start their FUD machines.

A misleading and stupid fluff article. That being said, if an organization was stupid enough to buy into the MS teamsters-style product circle, they deserve all what they have coming to them.

MS Thug: "So, Bill says you will be upgrading to Vista for your enterprise application and will require all new workstations as well. We'll put you down for 1,000 seats."

Moron CIO: "Um, no, we're fine where we are and we only have 200 users anyway."

MS Thug: "BILL SAYS YOU WILL BE UPGRADING OR HE WILL BE VERY UPSET."

Moron CIO: "Yes sir, better make it 2,000 seats and some Vista cert classes too!"

Back when I was on Vista RC2, I installed Visual Studio 2005 as well as SQL Server 2005 just fine. When it came to SQL Server installation, it gave me a dialog at the end that said to "download SQL Server 2005 Service Pack 2 for compatibility with this version of Windows" or something to that extent. I disregarded the message and it ran just fine.

Umm.. marking as inaccurate.

My company has SQL Server running on Vista. We have SQL Express running on it. We have pretty much everything we need to develop in and for Vista running ON vista.

It's okay to not like microsoft for their (admittingly more Past actions), but to make stuff up? That's just low.

even funnier:
If you use hot mail and IE 7 and try to attach a file it will tell you that you need to upgrade to at least IE5. ***** stupid M$. Its works fine on firefox. WTF are they thinking these days?

this is total FUD

My company has spent the last 18 months developing a product that uses SQL Server Express 2005 as an embedded database, and it works fine on Vista. We've been testing SQL Server Express and Vista since last March.

There were some Vista related bugs in the first release of SSE 2005, and MS released a SP1 to correct that around June. Vista is listed in the system requirements:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/sysreqs.mspx

I can only guess that the rumor started because MSDE is not supported on Vista, but they announced MSDE is getting replaced by SSE a long time ago

Well, anyone in a 'Corporate' environment isn't going to give a crap about this, if you are running SQL on a workstation running Vista, your an idiot to start with. I think this article is all FLASH and no bang. My company is already heavy into testing software requiring access to SQL servers and is having no problems doing so. If you are running SQL Express in a business environment on a workstation you have much larger problems than that.

Ha Ha!

bury... rbridenb said it already.

Ha,ha MS SQL server is a big rip off. I applaud all of you that use it and then pad the pockets of Gates and Balmer. 99% of the internally developed corp apps don't use half of the fluff features, but the brainless corp managers will spend 50,000 dollars on a SQL install when they could have simply used Postgresl which simply ROCKS.......
Vendor supplied data on M$ SQL Server? No problem, you can easily pull this data into Postgresal using DBLink_TDS and it acts like it is native Postgresql data.
Need support and Oracle compatibilty along with the standard Postgresql features? No problem, check out EnterpriseDB at http://www.enterprisedb.com it's only 1000 per year per CPU, and no limitation on the number of users. The M$ SQL server CAL is the biggest rip off ever.
People stop throwing money away and makeing M$ richer.

I agree that Postgresql is simply stunning, they just released version 8.2 as well.
For more information see http://www.postgresql.org or for big time corp support
see http://www.enterprisedb.com

for a kick ass IDE type Admin program for Postgresql see:
http://www.amsoftwaredesign.com
Tabbed MDI interface, code completion and much much more.

Are you stupid? Vista is a desktop OS. You don't run SQL Server on a desktop.

Vista SQL Server Express 2005 is a desktop version of SQL Server 2005 and it DOES run on Vista.

When will the stupidity end.

Pure, unadulterated, FUD. And false, to boot.
Reflects very badly on CNN.

Buried,

Even if it is true (which according to some of the posters here, it isn't). The idea that SQL *express* (the free version from MS, not the full blown SQL server) not yet running on vista would drive people to IBM and Oracle is ludicrous.

The story is inaccurate. I have been running SQL Express on my laptop running Vista since beta 1.

http://www.thegridmaster.com/images/SqlExpressOnVista.jpg