Comments on: SQL Server next version Community Technology Preview 1.1 now available

By: Dave P

Dave P — Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:40:13 +0000

In reply to JaviAl. You really need to start using Enterprise versions of Windows and you'll then have all of your list. As for supporting Windows versions that are out of mainstream support, why would Microsoft do that? The security and performance benefits of current OS versions makes those the only place to start using a new SQL version. Next you'll be asking for support on Windows XP or 3.1! I suggest you design and deploy new systems with current technology, or use the many options that are supported on your platform of choice.

By: JaviAl

JaviAl — Mon, 19 Dec 2016 11:55:15 +0000

Whould you solve the problem with compatibility with Windows 7 SP1 and Windows Server 2008 R2?

SQL Server 2016 and v.Next are the only database server software that not run on those systems. If in the future, if there are no compatibility with this OS’s i will migrate to another database server software or until you develop a new desktop OS (non-mobile) with non mobile APPS (UWP), no Windows Store, no Metro/Modern design, no forced updates, no Settings instead of Control Panel, no Microsoft account, return of Shadow Copies, advanced appearance settings, Start Menu like Windows 7, no ADS, no telemetry, etc.

By: Peter

Peter — Sat, 17 Dec 2016 00:37:28 +0000

for as long SQL queries cannot follow a GitHub versioning pattern, its doomed to be nothing more then static log system.
so never mind the gadgets we (web devs) could as wel go back to plain file servers with a bigh cash, it be faster than SQL.
and to be honest, i think a lot of people regret past decisions to go for SQL instead of MySql (its what i hear often).
as well basically its just storage of structured data, and that’s not so fancy in essence.
oh well your turn.. prove me wrong.