>>>>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?
>
>May have been better than 2005. But, given Kevins description of the application and the context in which it would be used, I still think CE would have been a better option. Does anyone disagree...... ??
>
>>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>
>
>LOL - but that done, it is not a trivial task to put together a DVD that will install SQL Express and an application, hand it to a computer illiterate punter and expect the whole think to install seamlessly. And if the end-user is already using SQL Express (or any other version of MS SQL) you either have to install another instance (which the end user probably won't want) or add the neccessary database/s on the existing instance. etc. etc.....

Just curious, I agree with you, but I'm also wondering if anyone asked him about his test installs he ran before taking it to the customer? Were any problems experienced with those? Typically a few test installs on other machines are done before installing on a customer's machine. It may not have prevented his specific issue, but I don't recall any messages about it. I think my process would have been different only because I spent a few years installing on many customer systems (single standalone machines and small networks) for small insurance agents. I would have tested on a few standalone machines and if no issues, gone to the customer site. Once there, I would most likely have researched the issue on site via the web and done the steps required to resolve it and then made those available for the next install. However, it is possible, while unlikely, that the customer did not have a suitable network connection for that or that business needs required his computer immediately be available. Under those situations, the install is typically done after hours. It's always easy to arm chair quarterback but at least this experience is one more to use as a learning step in the whole business (I use "business" instead of "process" because issues may arise with any backend including foxpro tables).