Ballmer comments on Yukon
By Bill Graziano
on 19 December 2000
| 1 Comment
| Tags: SQL Server 2005
After Microsoft's profit warning last week, Microsoft president Steve Ballmer wrote a memo to employees discussing cost cutting. It also had some interesting comments in it about "Yukon" which I though was the code name for the next version of SQL Server. Now I'm not sure what it is.
In October we posted a link to an article
describing "Yukon" as the code name for the next version of SQL Server. Today Microsoft president Steve Ballmer wrote a memo to MS employees that talked about cost cutting measures. The memo was "obtained" by CNET's News.com
who wrote an article
about it. I was more intersted in some of the references to Yukon in the article.
Here's the first: These changes mean tough choices. Microsoft removed two features from the next version of Office, partly to focus on the next release of the SQL Server database software, Ballmer explained
. I'm fine with that. Office has plenty of features for me. Although I am excited to use the new version of Outlook with it's improved support for multiple mail accounts.
The next quote is that the company also is banking on a new technology code-named Yukon "that will be key to our next-generation storage, database, file system, email, and user interface work," Ballmer wrote
Yukon will be the key to their future user interface? As well as storage and email? The earlier Yukon article also mentioned improved file system support. Is Yukon finally going to be the long awaited Cairo? Will the database be the operating system? Exchange runs (or at least used to run) on a tweaked version of the Jet engine (MS Access). Are they porting this to SQL Server?
The last quote is mostly marketing fluff: While the technology is "two years or so off, (it) is a core .Net and Windows technology and we will ask all development groups to organize their product plans to have new versions available in that timeframe based on Yukon and our .Net programming model."
It does mention that the technology is a couple of years off. That's probably just as well. I'm still trying to move some of my clients off SQL Server 6.5. I'm not ready for a new version yet.
So what does this mean for SQL Server? Well, I don't know yet but I'll keep digging. If you have any inside scoops pass them along.