http://www.osnews.com/story/14382/SQL_Server_2005_SP1_Released Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:58:26 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread?116636 http://osnews.com/thread?116636 Unfortunately this SP didn't fix ANY of the bugs that plague SQL Server Management Studio, which is largely a steaming pile of junk (I never thought I'd miss Ent Mgr or Query Analyzer). SSMS doesn't really say much for .Net as that's mostly what it's written in. Slow, bloated, and full of bugs.

The engine itself is VERY nice though; we've noticed upwards of 20% performance increases on some of our apps, and that's without even using some of the new perf based features in Sql2k5. Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?116649 http://osnews.com/thread?116649 please add ms sql server
sql server mean nothing... Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (collinm) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?116656 http://osnews.com/thread?116656 But "SQL Server 2005" means Microsoft - it is the only company with a product named that. Thu, 20 Apr 2006 22:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BrianH) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?116687 http://osnews.com/thread?116687 "please add ms sql server
sql server mean nothing..."

Yes... and don't you dare refer to MS Windows as just Windows, MS Office as Office, MS Internet Explorer as Internet Explorer, MS Exchange Server as Exchange Server, MS SMS Server as SMS Server, or MS Visual Studio as Visual Studio.

Actually... I don't want anyone to refer to IBM DB2 as DB2, or IBM WebMethods as WebMethods, IBM Lotus Notes as Notes, IBM AIX as AIX, Sun Solaris as Solaris...

They all mean nothing unless you refer to them properly. Fri, 21 Apr 2006 00:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Don T. Bothers) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?116711 http://osnews.com/thread?116711 Having use quite a lot SQL server 7 - 2000 and now 2005 and also Oracle 10g, I personaly think that SQL server Management studio or Enterprise manager/Query Analyser are much better/faster/easier to use then anything provide by Oracle. Fri, 21 Apr 2006 03:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (topos) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?116723 http://osnews.com/thread?116723 Now that's something I'll definitely agree with. Truth be told, I actually use SQL++ for Oracle and osql/sqlcmd.exe for SQL Server for most tasks, but for "quick and dirty" stuff I'll use the GUI tools.

The GUI tools for Oracle are absolutely useless (I blame the fact they're writting in Java), but SQL Server could stand to learn quite a bit from SQL++ (which they seem to have done for sqlcmd.exe...an absolute dream of a CLI tool compared to osql). Fri, 21 Apr 2006 05:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?116756 http://osnews.com/thread?116756 "The GUI tools for Oracle are absolutely useless"

Truth be told, all the Oracle developers I know of (and a lot of sysdamins too) use Toad as the one and only tool for db developement. It is head and shoulders above the rest.
But there are many other valid packages out there, such as PLSQLDeveloper, or the Embarcadero stuff. Heck, even the Java ones such as Aqua data studio or dbvisualizer are much better than any db tool ever offered by MS.

I completely agree about SQL Server Management Studio being a pile of junk: extremely buggy, kept the worst interface parts from Ent Mgr instead of going with what is by now the defacto standard in gui for db development tools, etc...

Take a look at quest's Toad for sqlserver if you want to see how it should be done... Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ggiunta) Comments