I've just downloaded it from the MSDN subscriber downloads site... If you have the Visual Studio Beta you should un-install because there is a later .NET framework version in the SQL Server bits and it complains. Thats all for now - I'm off to play with Yukon. Check back later for more as I discover it.

I'm in the middle of writing a custom DTS transform to perform fast key lookups for dimensioning facts as they are streamed into the database. I'll post more when I have completed it but for now I'm disappointed to find out that there is no way to provide any sort of user interface beyond the standard property dialog.

This strikes me as a major oversight on Microsoft's part considering they managed to do it for custom tasks. I have to question why they didn't add the capability. A number of the built in transforms have custom dialogs that appear when you click the properties button so it must be possible.

There are two reasons that I can think of. The first is that there is a way to provide custom transform dialogs and this is how they implement their own transform UIs but the interface is undocumented. The second is that the main transform task also implements all the UIs for the transforms.

Subscribers to the "evil empire" theory will probably favour the first reason. I can't agree because keeping the interface private would only benefit Microsoft if they were selling their own custom transforms. If the second is true then they are responsible for some pretty poor design. This is especially true because they managed to get the design right for custom tasks. The teams can't be that big that communication breaks down so it must be those little private offices they all have.

Maybe someone on the DTS team can enlighten me?

Just a random picture of my computer i have lying around.

In a previous article I was moaning about how Googling for my name dragged up pages of Harry Potter related stuff. Well thanks to this blog and the linking from sites such as Tech-Ed Bloggers. I can now say that a Goggle query on James Snape returns my content in the first three eight slots with another three links in the first two pages. Up yours Harry Potter...

My latest gadget arrived today - a Wi-Fi Seeker. It's a key chain sized device for detecting wireless 802.11b and g networks. Just point and push the button, the lights tell you if there is a signal and how strong it is.

It managed to point out the access points in the office and also my internet provider at home (I have wireless broadband as I'm too far from the exchange for ADSL). I reckon it works pretty well.

As for it's usefulness, we'll have to see. But that isn't the point - you have geek toys "just because you can".

Wallace McClure writes "What is the problem with Marketing People?" Where he makes the point that marketing people care more about selling product than learning about their customer's business.

I'm not sure this is especially a marketing affliction. In my experience they care more about "the message" that we, the vendor, wants to communicate. There is an old adage that "when you talk you are teaching whereas when you listen you are selling". If so then their focus is probably correct. Leave the selling to the sales team.

I do agree though that if you don't take the time to understand your client's business model you can end up damaging your relationship with them (and looking a bit stupid too).

The thing to consider is the difference between commercial and business focus. The first is about sales, turnover and profit whereas the later is concerned with relationships, strategy and growth. Both are required but they need balance.

Having had recent experience with customers wanting bespoke solutions for pocket change I'm not sure it's always the best policy to try and get your product in by any means possible. One thought has just occurred to me - if you are a small company, is it better to lead with a product and provide professional services support or start with consultancy backed up by off the shelf product? Also, does it matter if you get the consultancy fee and don't recommend your product because it's not right for the situation?

We used to have a very successful business model with the consultancy first option but have moved to a more product oriented focus. I'm not sure how it's doing just yet. I'll let you know.

We hold these every morning at 10:30am as it's a time when everyone can get into the office. Three questions are asked of each developer:

1. What did you complete since the last meeting?
2. What blocked you since the last meeting?
3. What do you intend to complete before the next meeting?

The answers to these three questions provide a snappy status update for the entire team. In particular, the second question is a direct request me me to do something.

To keep the meetings short there is supposed to be no additional discussion beyond the three questions. If needed then it should be scheduled directly after the meeting. However our meetings have recently begun to drag on as I found the "after meeting" gatherings weren't happening and I let the discussion happen in-line for fear of it never happening (a self fulfilling prophesy?).

The side affect of this is to subject everyone to a level of detail that may not be relevant to them, wasting time and boring them. So today I've asked everyone to answer their questions in 2 minutes. The benefit of a short meeting is obvious but in addition it gives people practise at concise communication.

Hopefully this should work, but if not then I'll resort to a trick I used at Sony - a two minute egg timer. Once the time runs out you have to shut up. If you have more to say then you have to e-mail everyone.

A note for self though - I must ensure the post meetings happen.

I love the mechanics of interviews, especially the "Microsoft Interview". The two best references I know of are How Would You Move Mount Fuji? and Programming Interviews Exposed. If you come for interview at Exony - be prepared for questions like these.

For a personal view of the Microsoft process, you can't beat Aaron Boodman’s account. His description of the screening process includes a telephone step with a developer where he asks you a programming question and you have three minutes to e-mail him back the solution. I think this is a great way to get some code out of a candidate before they have to come to the office.

I was just checking my stats for the week and I see that I've had 600 visits and 10,000 hits. I'd love to know who is reading this blog and why so leave a comment and let me know who you are. If you let me know why you're visiting then maybe I can taylor my posts accordingly...

When you install dasBlog in the root of a web server as I have, it's web.config is inherited by all lower level applications. This is a problem for nGalley as the dasBlog config has <httpModules> loaded. You can unload them by adding the following to the nGallery web.config:

<httpModules>
  <remove name="ControlImageModule" />
  <remove name="UrlMapperModule" />
  <remove name="CompressionModule" />
</httpModules>

This doesn't quite solve the problem though as the nGallery application still needs to be able to load the dasBlog assemblies in order to remove the <httpModules> so add the dasBlog assemblies to the nGallery bin folder.

I'm not too sure why you still need the assemblies in the nGallery bin directory - maybe someone can enlighten me.

I've installed an image gallery to store all the pictures I've taken over the years. You can find it at http://www.jamessnape.me.uk/gallery or use the link in the Navigation menu.

In an earlier post I promised to explain why I didn't remove a block for one of the devs. Well here goes...

The block in question was a customer who needed support for a new version of our product they were evaluating. This type of job should really be handled by either the support guys or our professional services people. However, the version of the product being evaluated has only just rolled off the build machine and they haven't yet had the chance to get up to speed with it.

Obviously, customers are the life-blood of any company and therefore their needs must be met by any method available. We are a small company (approximately 30 employees) so roles are not so well defined as "developer" or "support" - we have to muck in and help out with whatever may be required. If that means investing time in a customer with the potential to produce revenue then so be it.

Given these circumstances, I think its justified to divert development resource in pursuit of customer needs. One thing to strive for next time though is better training and preparation for the people supporting the product.