>>>>>>>>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.
>>>
>>>It looks as if Kevin's problem in this instance was down to SQL2005 choking on a newer version of MSXML than that expected. To be fair you could do a lot of test installations without running into that particular scenario?
>>>
>>>>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).
>>>
>>>I guess your experience is more relevant to Kevin's situation - on-site, hands-on installation. My thinking was coloured by a situation we will be facing when the application I'm currently working on is rolled out. Based on the current customer profile there will be :
>>>A few large users who will want to use existing instances of SQL2000/2005/2008 to be used as the data store
>>>A few more large users who will not have existing SQL servers but will require SQL2008 for 50+ users,
>>>A much larger number of users (~2000) whose requirement is for a simple single computer, single user installation.
>>>
>>>The first two groups are obviously large enough to warrant having someone take the time to travel to the site and make a custom installation - we wouldn't even try to build an automated installation process.
>>>
>>>But that's not the case with the last group - the software revenue would not justify even spending an hour on the installation. So the jury is still out on whether to use SQL-CE or SQL2008 Express for these (database size will not be a factor - even the large users only use comparatively puny tables). My gut feeling is that if I hired someone to create the installer for this using SQL2008 and agreed to pay them $10 for every successful installation on condition that they paid me $50 for every fail then I would be making a substantial profit (but taking a lot of grief from the customers)
>>>
>>>I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has successfully created a fully-automated install package for an application using SQL2008 Express that installed successfully on, say, 95% of sites.......
>>>Best,
>>>Viv
>>
>>
>>From my experience you need to have a very clear definition of the system those single PC users can install on and a clear line on what happens if it doesn't work. ie they buy a new (clean PC) or clean an existing one.
>
>That doesn't sound like a viable real-world solution to me.
>I know what my response would be if I was told that if a piece of software I had bought failed to install then I should either re-install the OS or just buy a new machine :-}.


Yes But.

I once had a situation where I developed a small application for a firm. It installed cleanly on several machines I had. Its installed cleanly on several of their machines. then one machine it wouldn't install. Couldn't find out why. just something already on that machine stopped it dead. (this was using Personal Web Server. it was some years ago:-)).

I then had long discussion about wether it was finished etc and should they pay me. Had I agreed the spec of the target machines in the first place that might not have been a problem.

If you don't have some sort of agreement about the base machine its a bit open.

I contacted Microsoft about the problem and their response was re inatll the O/S