"Al Christoph" wrote:

> 1. If this is a repeat posting, please forgive me. My single continuing
> complaing about MS is that they don't have an industrial strength (i.e. as
> capable and fast as google) search engine either on the web sites or in the
> IDE. I use google so much more than the Help button - MS lurkers take note.
>
> 2. I had repeated problem with the beta, the rc and now the production
> releases of VS 2005 getting SQL Express to install - but only on one
> particular PC. I chalked it up to the preliminary nature of the stuff. NOT SO.
>
> I solved the problem today by downloading SQL Express as a standalone
> install. Ran it. And found out exactly what was wrong.
>
> I'm going to shout this because of the consequences and the stupidity of it:
>
> SQL EXPRESS 2005 WILL NOT INSTALL ON A COMPRESSED OR AN ENCRYPTED DRIVE.
>
> Words to that effect came out of the stand alone install. I put up a
> non-compressed folder for it and it installed hunky dorry. (I didn't fire up
> VS 2005 install again. That just takes to agonizingly long.)
>
> NOW HERE IS WHY I'M SHOUTING.
>
> I think we are being encouraged to use SQL Express as part of our
> distributable products. Can you imagine what a real small business user will
> do to my trial if he has that kind of XPerience on the install??????
>
> This is really very unacceptable. If a non-compressed/unencrypted directory
> is needed then do whatever it takes to make the user experience trouble free.
> For example, at least with compression it is possible to make an uncompressed
> subdirectory and install it there. The install program should do this
> semi-automatically in the same way that it queries (used to query) about
> making a new directory.
> Logic should be
> 1. dectect can't install in user specified directory (or the default
> directory)
> 2. find a name in that user specified directory that is unique and reasonable
> 3. make sure that in can be created
> 4. propose to the user to do it
> Alternatively, tell t he user to specify the name of a new directory and let
> him know that you will be able to create it uncompressed / unencrypted. I.E.
> make it clear that user does not need to go out and try creating the
> directory on his own.
>
> Now it may very well be that the latter would work with the present install.
> In that case the error message needs to be revamped to make it MUCH MORE
> HELPFUL.
>
> 3. With respect to the VS2005 install. I"m sure it's been heard repeatedly
> here. It needs to be much friendlier about its complaints when things fail.
> Be specific. I don't remember if i had the option of where it tried to put
> SQL Expresss but if the message had been in a nice place and not bured in 50
> MB of log even if it is there) then I could have easily rigged things so that
> the necessary folder was not compressed.
>
> 4. More to the point, i'd strongly suggest an industrial strength file and
> registry cleaning tool be made avialable. Something just short of a
> reformat:-))) VS knows what it needs to setup. The tool should use that info
> to produce a list of all registry entries, files and folders that should be
> blown away for the install to be successful. User generated files could be
> backed up. The tool that is currently available off the release notes DID NOT
> HACK IT on one of my boxes. I'm hand cleaning the registry. (The MSDN 2005
> Beta shows up in list of installed programs in add / remove but apparently
> ain't there anymore.)
>
> Enough already.
>
> Now if we'd just get print form back.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Al Christoph
> Senior Consultant and Proprietor
> Three Bears Software, LLC