>>>To everyone who responsed to this....
>>>
>>>I have spent the last 2 weeks creating tables and writing scripts in SQL to support a small C# WinForms contact management
>>>application a client hired me to write.
>>>
>>>I posted this thread because I thought that 1) SQL was overkill, and 2) every time I have tried to install any version of SQL there
>>>are failures.
>>>
>>>Sure enough I went to my client's office at lunch to install SQL and the app. The SQL installation failed. This is the reason:
>>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/968749
>>>
>>>Notice the "workaround". Notice that to fix this I will have to download, install, and run some other tool, and then hope that this
>>>will be all of it.
>>>
>>>This is exactly why I didn't want to go with SQL, or any other server based DB. Had I gone with VFP or Access, my client would
>>>be using his software right now.
>>>
>>>Now some of you will inevitably say, have him do this, or ask him to install that... This guy is an Allstate insurance agent with the
>>>computer literacy of my 7 year old. He expects me, rightfully so, to show up, push a few buttons, and voila! - instant software.
>>>
>>>Al have always held to the rule of using the right tool for the job. SQL was not the right too for this job.
>>
>>Well I *did* suggest the CE version. No install issues with that......
>
>And didn't we suggest SQL EXpress 2008?
>
>And if a developer says "every time I have tried to install any version of SQL there
>are failures." I would be tempted to look for the one constant in the equation <bg>


OTOH maybe some people are installing on a slightly grubbier user base than you high flyers up there in the clouds.

There's a lot to be said for being able to install something that has no problem with whatever else is already on the machine and ,aybe fox is a bit more like that than SQL Server.