SQL Server Everywhere. It's all in the name (or is it?)
Unfortunately, I think Microsoft has stepped off on the wrong foot as far as the marketing of the SQL Server Everywhere edition. For obvious reasons, I expect they wanted to leverage the popularity and reputation of its deadly serious SQL Server DBMS. This makes sense, but technically, SQL Server Everywhere (SQL Ev) is not SQL Server (like SQL Server Express or the other paid editions). I’m of the opinion that if you name a product, it should bear some resemblance to that product. Each product name carries with it the baggage (negative attributes) and benefits (positive attributes) of its namesake. Calling something SQL Server when it’s not is deceptive and can be confusing when one assumes that it’s a clone of the predecessor or parent product. This also means when the customer gets the product and opens the box, they’re often disappointed when it does not look, taste or smell like what they expected. It’s like selling plastic “chocolate-like” bunnies to kids at Easter. As soon as they take their first bite on the left ear, they’ll know the difference—and you’ll regret it. No, I don’t mean to imply that SQL Ev is not edible, er, suitable because it is. It’s a perfectly good DBMS engine that can take on quite a few important responsibilities when it comes to storing, managing, fetching and replicating local data stores. It’s just not SQL Server and should not be expected to have the same feature set.
If Microsoft had simply called it “SQL Everywhere”, your expectations and mine would have been different. If they had left the name “SQL Mobile” we would have understood where it fit and what is was capable of doing. But they didn’t, so authors, trainers and those attempting to explain where SQL Ev fits have to spend their first 800 words telling you what SQL Ev isn’t—instead of what it is. We've already seen this in the blog entries... Steve, please reconsider your choice of names.