>Server side? Of course that will be with us but most of the action is on the client side.
>
>And you know this because....? Remember you're talking to someone who deals with company recruiters on a regular basis.
>
>Mike, I'm sorry, but your entire position is a mess.
>
>- You said I'm involved with a "fairly narrow range of Microsoft annointed technologies". I really don't consider .NET and SharePoint and SQL Server as "narrow". Quite candidly, I'm surprised you'd make this statement, considering your own circumstances.
>
>I've written a custom course that has been delivered to hundreds of people that teaches data warehousing and dimensional modeling and different aspects of the Inmon and Kimball methodologies, along with OLAP as a concept. Did you see a specific technology in that last sentence? Put another way...you really know very little about what I do.
>
>- You completely ignored Business Intelligence - an area that's been emerging, and an area where I have a pretty decent hand in the game. There are tools both from Microsoft as well as other competing vendors like ProClarity and QlikTech and other third-party ETL products. Again, you really need to get some facts.
>
>- On smartphones and tables....there are just as many nascent technologies on the server side as there are on the client side. Mobile devices often need server-side components. Why don't you ask me what I've been doing with Parallel Data Warehouse (Madison)? Why don't you ask what I've been doing with geospatial data recently? And on the other side, why don't you ask what I've been doing with PowerPivot, an increasingly popular tool with a unique identity? Why don't you ask me what I've been doing with Denali? I think I have a hand in the game of several new important technologies
>
>- Your question about receptiveness to unsettling things is really pretentious. Pretentious and silly and intended to bait. Nothing going on with mobile development (which is on the rise, no question) significantly marginalizes other areas, nor does it make other platforms less relevant. People moved from VFP to .NET. People aren't moving "from" SQL Server "to" mobile devices. There are significant differences in the way things scale, and you need to get a perspective on the context.
>
>You could have asked me how many SSAS developers were a bit "unsettled" (myself included) about the plans in the next release of SSAS to offer a 2nd OLAP model that may some day make the current MS OLAP model look obsolete. So you see, there ARE people having to deal with these issues, except they don't whine and piss and moan about it. They learn and they move on. But you didn't ask me about this...and we both know why.
>
>As it stands, I think it's safe to say the word "narrow" could better be used to apply to your view.
>And JR, since I know you're reading...the only thing worse than a bad analysis is someone two steps behind, trying to dress it up with credibility.
>
>I'm through with this discussion.

Sounds like you guys are just arguing about the definition of 'narrow'.
Pretty much everything you've mentioned above comes under the category of relational database management ?
From one POV that could be considered 'narrow' , from another, a huge field relied on by pretty much every end user in one form or another.