Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

insurancesitesfind » Blog Archive » Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 04:19:44 GMT

PingBack from http://www.insurancesitesfind.com/?p=6939

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Jens — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:37:49 GMT

So you guys are actually admittingthat Linq To SQL is a dead end ? Thanks a lot. Linq To SQL has taht 'it just works' attitude to it and is the underpinning of our new project. I coud never ever persuade my boss to go to Entity Framework.

And if you're really listening to your customers regarding Linq To SQL, we'll ga and read up all posts on the internet. I think there are plenty of things we'd like (I for one have a long wish list, with on number one a sync tool for the designer). There as a time that MS aimed at the small and medium sized businesses, and Linq To SQL is perfect for those, never forget the basis of your success ...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

int19h — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:28:37 GMT

Can we have a SharePoint Entity Framework provider, please? please? ;)

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

John — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:51:34 GMT

A appreciate the desire to have a single 'Linq to DB' framework, but I hope the proposed Entity Framework will offer full Linq To Sql compatibility? Allowing a painless transition to people who don't need all the extra muscle of the framework. I'd rather do OR mapping myself, and use Linq To SQL as a simple way to grab the data only. EF is current a long way from what I'd need!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Matt Brooks — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:15:01 GMT

I agree with John. LINQ to SQL offers a great light weight data access option with a number of key extensibility points and 'get-out' options when it doesn't provide the required functionality.

It is fine if MS have bigger plans for the Entity Framework and I'm glad to hear LINQ to SQL will continue to be developed and supported. You say you will listen to community feedback and evolve the product accordingly but what we lack at the moment is an official list of potential features, like a vNext roadmap.

I think at least knowledge that something like this is in the pipeline will ease developers anxieties regarding their investment in LINQ to SQL.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Kristofer — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 20:20:11 GMT

@Jens,

The number one item on your wish-list is here: http://www.huagati.com/dbmltools/

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Stephen Redd — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:10:02 GMT

What I want is a light version of EF that does what LINQ to SQL does. It should enable the same simple usage scenario I have with LINQ to SQL, but it should use the same logical model and API as EF.

Most importantly it needs to be fully compatible with newer MS technologies that are planning to build on top of EF down the road.

The simpler usage scenario is especially useful to web developers... Most web apps, even the large ones, really don't need THAT much abstraction between the relational schema and the logical one. We don't need all the fancy mappings, the inheritance, and other advanced stuff that EF provides.

Sure, we don't care if it CAN do all those abstract things... we just don't want those features getting in our way, complicating how we use the entities, or putting shackles on what we can do or how it performs because some enterprise edge case scenario has a conflicting requirement.

Most web programmers just want a simple way to model our data and automate the persistence stuff so we can unleash LINQ in our apps without having to spend too much time worried about how to push data around behind the scenes.

But we don't want to be left out of the loop with future tech that builds on the EF and LINQ to Entities... and it looks like MS has a LOT of stuff building on EF in the works.

Oh!, Please give us a conversion tool to help move existing LINQ to SQL apps over to LINQ to Entities and EF....

Right now EF just isn't ready so many of us are sticking with LINQ to SQL until we can see if the next version of EF and LINQ to Entities is better. It would be nice if we can be assured that we aren't going to be stuck facing a massive manual code migration down the road.

LINQ To SQL Gets Kicked to the Curb... Needs A Good Home!

David Hayden [MVP C#] — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:59:21 GMT

Based on the recent announcement on the ADO.NET Team Blog : "We’re making significant investments

LINQ To SQL Gets Kicked to the Curb... Needs A Good Home!

Community Blogs — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:23:19 GMT

Based on the recent announcement on the ADO.NET Team Blog : "We’re making significant investments

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Colin Jack — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:23:34 GMT

"We are listening to customers regarding LINQ to SQL and will continue to evolve the product based on feedback we receive from the community as well."

I really hope this is the case, if it is then I'd recommend considering the following two links:

http://codebetter.com/blogs/david.hayden/archive/2008/10/30/linq-to-sql-gets-kicked-to-the-curb-needs-a-good-home.aspx

http://codebetter.com/blogs/ian_cooper/archive/2008/07/02/showing-some-support-for-linq-to-sql.aspx

Roadmap para o Linq to SQL e Linq to Entities

LUTI @ Microsoft — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:59:45 GMT

Bom, já têm um tempinho que nós vemos um enfoque maior no Entity Framework que no Linq

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

The Other Steve — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 05:31:25 GMT

This makes no sense. Are you actually listening to customers?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Saud — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:20:26 GMT

I guess, they spent all the money on silly Vista ads!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Reva — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:49:23 GMT

LINQ to SQL is too good to killed like this, At least put it out on codeplex

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Milan — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:41:37 GMT

Hi,

"We are listening to customers regarding LINQ to SQL and will continue to evolve the product based on feedback we receive from the community as well."

Can you please show me anybody from the team bloging about LINQ to SQL? Or discussing anything with community? Giving some responses? Doing any development after 3.5?

DamienG entered LINQ to SQL team 4/1/2008. After that you will see only 3 notes about LINQ at his blog...

Why is not possible for you to do some support?

And the main: "why there is never any response"? You publish "Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap" 10/29 - every information about roadmap is important everytime. And look - two day later it is discussed here and on different blogs - but there is NO RESPONSE from you or anybody else from your team. I don't think that you are showing respect to your customers which invests into your technologies

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Muhammad Mosa — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:15:11 GMT

Sounds like everybody is excited a little bit! I am not a Linq to SQL fan but I admit it is a cool and very light and easy to use. So why ADO.NET team simplify this us! Are you going to continue developing and extending LINQ to SQL or not? It is only one year old technology if it is killed now better than being killed after few years! I am not asking to abandon it of course I am just wondering what is going on? puting the project on CodePlex as open source would be great idea of course.

Entity Framewok is much more advanced, designed to support different DB providers. Why I would use LINQ to SQL while I have something similar (but LINQ to Entities is not as powerful as LINQ to SQL) that support different Databases?! The only reason I can see was at the time of LINQ to SQL there was not EF, it was Beta and that is why no body really paied attention to it. And in EF v1 still LINQ to SQL is much better than LINQ to Entities.

So the post need to be clarified LINQ to SQL will remain and last forever or will die?!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Ian Cooper — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:22:18 GMT

LINQ To SQL supports important domain first modelling ideas like persistence ignorance that were woefully lacking from EF. It is a shame that it is not raised as the solution for customers who want that option more.

It is tragic that the EF team did not pick up on the design understanding shown by the L2S team.

It is tragic that the Data Services team continue to mischaracterize L2S as a RAD tool.

It is tragic that support for features like fine-grained object models and exposed provider model, trumped as key advantages of EF, will not be added to L2S.

The journey from L2S to be a ral competitor to Nhiberate is much shorter than the journey for EF.

It remains the best offering from MS in this space.

If you want to know what I believe you could do to support the product, please follow this link: http://codebetter.com/blogs/ian_cooper/archive/2008/07/01/architecting-linq-to-sql-part-10.aspx

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Sidar Ok — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:20:12 GMT

Linq to SQL is indeed one of the most useful tools in my toolbelt, but I can't say the same with EF. EF is a great example that if you don't listen your community & customers, you are going to get no confidence. Microsoft should have taken some lessons out of this already.

What we need is, support for other models than TPH and enabled provider model, and that's it. Why doesn't anybody hear us again ?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Kristofer — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:51:46 GMT

What is missing from Tim's post above is something along the lines of: "We have learnt a lesson from the EFv1 fiasco and so we're actually in the process of integrating all the goodies from Linq-to-SQL (copying-and-pasting code) into EFv2.".

He didn't say that, but he demoed several features during his PDC "Entity Framework Futures" session that look like they have been copied-and-pasted straight from L2S into EF. Watch this if you can spare 90 minutes and you'll see what I mean:

http://channel9.msdn.com/pdc2008/TL20/

Microsoft killing LINQ to SQL?

VistaDB .net database blog — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:23:11 GMT

Interesting blog post about it . And some related information on Stackoverflow posts . The basic gist appears to be comments made on the ado.net blog that state the Entity Framework is the only thing getting major developer time for Visual Studio 2010

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Colin Jack — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:24:38 GMT

"We have learnt a lesson from the EFv1 fiasco and so we're actually in the process of integrating all the goodies from Linq-to-SQL (copying-and-pasting code) into EFv2.".

If MS needs to learn from its own failures rather than learning from others then thats OK. Much slower than if they'd asked people, looked at existing practices/patterns but probably a lot more fun for the people involved.

Even accepting that though putting those features into EF is, in my view, not necessarily as good as having L2S. Depends on whether you think the whole EF foundation is sound, and I've heard nothing so far to make me think it is.

What bothers me most is that rather than learning about things like DDD/SOA/REST/TDD and then seeing how they can apply and improve on them they instead constantly try to come up with the next huge paradigm shift. Most of the time though its flavoured with the same old data-drag-drop style thinking:

1) DDD - Drag tables onto designer

2) REST - Generate resources from DB

3) SOA - Entity services/SOAP/WSDL

4) Web Design - Bind tables/datasets to controls

5) EIP/SOA - Drag and drop integration with Biztalk

6) DSLs - Graphical DSLs (drag-drop, you get the idea)

Does seem like some teams are listening though, look at MVC/JQuery on the Web side but thats more about MS listening and following rather than trying to drive the entire industry down some path that Redmond have decided is appropriate.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Jason Short — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:34:54 GMT

Microsoft has always said tha the Entity Framework was the ONLY provider model for LINQ. That means LINQ to SQL was doomed to be a proprietary implementation quickly eclipsed by EF.

EFV1 does need work, but that IS the model of the future from Microsoft. They just didn't ship in the box with VS 2008.

The late ship, and the confusion with people already starting LINQ to SQL over a year ago I think will lead to a lot of negative backlash towards EF, even though this has always been the plan.

Entity Framework third party providers are just starting to come out. The model is going through a rev 2. I think it is here to stay.

Goodbye Linq to SQL?

OnTheBlog — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:44:41 GMT

An interesting post has arrived on the Ado.net team blog with regard to the future of LINQ to SQL. Although not coming outright and saying it, it seems that LINQ to SQL is likely to be deprecated in t ...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

msp — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:00:21 GMT

I think this is a smart move. Having two things try to do essentially the same thing is just room for confusion. Do we use A and all it's simplicity of client programming or do we use B because it actually works with our more complicated persistence layer needs?

People trying to make that decision are in a lose-lose.

Merging the two products into one hopefully means we'll get the best of both worlds.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

anon — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:25:39 GMT

why wait or depend on MS, diy maybe? idk

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Joshua Thomas — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:41:06 GMT

If Microsoft is essentially depricating LINQ To SQL they need to make it open source, so those who use it are not left high and dry based on the new flavor of the day syndrom.

Whoever thought releasing LINQ To SQL was a good idea should be fired. Better to have one solution than competing solutions.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Travis — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:41:49 GMT

EF is a *far* superior product, but it does not come close to nHibernate. So does Linq To Sql dying bother me? No, I say good riddance to the POS.

Why all these shops are scared to use anything that is not from MS is beyond me...

The End of LINQ To SQL?

Gil Fink on .Net — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:20:13 GMT

The End of LINQ To SQL? Today I read a few blog posts that were published regarding  the announcement

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Colin Jack — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:23:33 GMT

"EF is a *far* superior product"

WS* star is *far* superior to REST according to one school of thought too though, choices. L2S seemed to me like a good foundation, a good v1 product.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

WS — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:39:21 GMT

Good thing we just invested a lot of time and money into dead-end tech!

There is no way we will touch EF after this...

LINQ To SQL is Dead - Read Between the Lines

David Hayden [MVP C#] — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 19:33:56 GMT

This is my last post on this subject, I promise, and unfortunately it has to be a little more blunt as

LINQ To SQL is Dead - Read Between the Lines

Community Blogs — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 19:41:44 GMT

This is my last post on this subject, I promise, and unfortunately it has to be a little more blunt as

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

kevindan — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 20:14:47 GMT

The team is simply out of the touch with Linq2SQL users. Hence there is the plea. Here is one feedback.

If it's a burden to have one MS team develop on two products, either have another team working on Linq2SQL, or release the technology out to the community. As a Linq2Sql user, I am very disappointed if MS keeps it closed without significant new developments.

The technology is too good to be killed, the investment from everyone should be preserved.

As one of the customers, I WANT LINQ2SQL to be continuously developed with significant new features, no matter who is going to do the work.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Alex — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 21:09:33 GMT

Disapointing... When you say to all your friends that "Microsoft is changing" they came with this.

Well, time to move back to Subsonic...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

dpblogs — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 22:00:16 GMT

Thank you for your comments. We apologize for the delay in response as we were at PDC this week, but wanted to get the post out in line with our PDC sessions. We would like to reiterate that we are listening to customers regarding LINQ to SQL and will continue to evolve the product based on feedback we receive from the community, but that as many of you said, we are making a significant investment in the Entity Framework and many other MS technologies are planning to build on the Entity Framework going forward.

We would like to assure you that as we invest in the Entity Framework going forward, it is our priority to ensure it enables the same simple, lightweight usage scenario you currently have with LINQ to SQL and will continue to be fully compatible with newer MS technologies that are building on top of the Entity Framework down the road. For more information on some of the features we are working on to enable this scenario in the Entity Framework please check out the EFDesign Blog and PDC’s EF Futures from this past Tuesday.

Elisa Flasko

Program Manager, Data Programmability

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

leo — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 23:05:01 GMT

I've met a lot of smart people at MS but the ado.net team is definitely not among them. thanks for deceiving me.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Brian Adams — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 01:48:30 GMT

It has been obvious via the posts that there was an internal spat and the vision of entity framework was somehow threatened by Linq to SQL. It is a shame that this resulted in killing the "it just works" solution. As a customer Linq to SQL is straight forward and gets the job done. Entity has another learning curve and requires me to manage more things than I necessary want. Unless you plan on making entity framework EASIER and QUICKER to impliment than Linq to SQL, you are making a mistake.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

HerbT — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 02:38:29 GMT

The simple fact that you MS people keep stressing your 'significant investment' in EF whenever the subject of LINQ to SQL comes up undermines any credibility you might have to the subject. You sound like political advisors on the evening news trying to dodge questions that will make your candidate look bad. We are not fools you know. We realize that there must have been some kind of internal turf war going on and somehow you guys won and are now pushing your next ill conceived, over designed, behemoth down our throats. So, great, some other yet-to-be-named MS monstrosity is going to be tied to this one, so that we can sink even faster with two boat anchors instead of one. LINQ to SQL is still the best choice. It is simple and elegant and nearly perfect except for a few minor features and other providers. Yet instead of investing where appropriate, you invest a whole lot more for a train wreck. Is there no accountability at Microsoft? You can't be drunk on the stock anymore, so it must be something else. All I can image is oversized egos need oversized projects. Get a clue and talk to REAL customers, not just the corporate muscle heads that approve purchase orders for SQL Server.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Mark — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:17:35 GMT

If you do dead end the project, you should MSPL it so the community can have it and do what they want with it.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Dmitry — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:29:40 GMT

I certainly agree with all the comments that LINQ to SQL is a simple, elegant and extensible solution that just works. It has a lot of potential. It definitely should be released to the community if Microsoft does not want to support it.

If LINQ to SQL were to support multiple database providers, ability to use multiple databases (at least on the same SQL server) and had value object support, it would have been an excellent ORM.

I'm not going to use Entity Framework; at least not until it gets a lot more lightweight and be persistent ignorant. I'd rather go with NHibernate 2.1 which is going to support LINQ.

更新LINQ to SQL和LINQ to Entities 产品路线图

EntLib — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:45:18 GMT

本文翻译自Tim Mallalieu, Program Manager, LINQ to SQL and Entity Framework 在ADO.NET Team Blog 上的文章。在.NET 4.0，我们将对Entity Framework 做出显著的投入，推荐Entity Framework 作为LINQ对关系数据库的数据访问解决方案。同时，我们正在倾听用户对LINQ to SQL的意见，同时基于来自社区的想法，继续发展LINQ to SQL。

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Jay — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 10:42:58 GMT

You really are a bunch of idiots! We have just engineered our whole product using LINQ to SQL. Can Microsoft make their damn minds up! Arrrggghhhhhhhhh

Linq to Sql is dead. Did you abstract well?

Hadi Hariri's Blog — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 10:53:03 GMT

Linq to Sql is dead. Did you abstract well?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Ori — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 14:02:24 GMT

Elisa,

Why should we trust that Entity Framework will be supported in the future? When the ADO.NET team decides on a new technology in a year or two, then Entity Framework will be tossed aside as well.

How can MS platform developers trust you after this?

Ori

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Whatever is my name — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 14:56:13 GMT

The only reason to stay with MS technology at all has been LINQ to SQL. Killi it and I simply will revert back to Delphi.

But you decision do not surprise me at all - if something works let's drop it and go for something that has problems - that way we can suck more money for 'fixes', 'updates', 'new releases'. More that usual typical Microsoft. You turning this into massive disappointment :( After all seems MS doesn't care about people opinion. I have been witness of that attitude for last 25 years. I'm really bored of you guys. After all seems your 'technology' plus 'attitude' sucks! Might be it's time for Linux?!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Neil — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:31:39 GMT

This decision is plain crazy.

In EF you have a product that has received a negative response from the developer community (including a lot of MVCs) not seen since .NET launched.

In Linq-to-sql you had a product that was basically liked by the developer community and where a lot of people and shops had invested time in learning the skills to use it and incorporating it into their application design.

As others have said bringing Linq-to-sql up to parity with NHibernate would have been relatively trivial.

What you have done is significantly piss off a large part of the developer community that others in Microsoft try so hard to cultivate. Why will these people possibly trust new technologies in the future, particularly those such as the EF, which is already so incredibly disliked (for very valid reasons).

The only hope MS has to rectify this situation is to release Linq-to-sql out to code plex as other have suggested. I worry that MS will not do this though as there is a very significant chance that were they to the community would take it on and turn it into a real force in the ORM space, one which would represent yet another nail in the EF coffin.

I feel very vindicated right now in persuading my company to adopt NHibernate, and battling against those who even yesterday were suggesting that the MS solution was the only one that could be trusted to be supported properly over the life of the application.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Trent — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 19:28:32 GMT

I just watched the video where they talk about EF. It does look like they adopted some stuff from linq to sql. They made it easier to get started without needing to edit the mapping. This is good really.

The problem I have is that they did this on top of entities that in my opinion is way behind linq to sql in use of linq, speed and quality of sql that is made at runtime. What is worse, they try to tell us that linq to sql is not dead, but they also told us before that the time to use it was when you had simple mapping and developed with rad style. Now they are trying to add all those same features to entities. I dont get it. They say they support linq to sql but are constantly upselling to linq to entities. How is this? both are free to me. why so much upsell to product that is made worse?

It seems to me that they make linq to sql like candy to lure me to MS and then try to switch me. bait and switch. why do they try to do this? it is all the same. i don't want to switch. why do they cause me so much trouble? it will now cost so much to switch my boss will blow his top.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Damien Guard — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 20:20:03 GMT

@Trent we are doing all this work so that if you start to exceed the LINQ to SQL feature set it won't cost so much to switch and your boss won't blow his top.

[)amien

Linq To SQL is dead?

BlogServiceHost.Create() — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 20:28:27 GMT

Negli ultimi giorni la notizia sono rimbalzate. Forse troppo. Ad una prima lettura non mi era sembrato

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

jmorris — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 02:41:26 GMT

Wow. After spending much frustration using the EF in a project, I finally realized that it was a shoddy, have baked product and converted over to L2SQL. L2SQL has been a pleasure to work with especially the tool support and extensibility. I guess its time to switch over to NHibernate...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Caber — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 06:29:29 GMT

For those LINQ to SQL fans, take a look at SqlTac(www.SqlTac.com). It extends LINQ to SQL with extension methods. Support for REST, WCF Window Messaging and Obfuscation attribute right out of the box. Over 25 different options.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

TracyR — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:36:23 GMT

It appears to me that there is room for both technologies at the current time and into the future. For the developers who develop using sql direct to the database and only for sql server then Linq-to-sql is the obvious choice.

For developers who develop in large IT shops that require stored procs for everything and a much larger base of connections then I believe that the Entity Framework will be best for them.

Fear not that if Microsoft stops development and support for Link-To-SQL in the future I believe there will still be a number of independent developers picking up the mantle and developing L2S into open source. I also have confidence that Microsoft will place this into Open Source if they are not continuing development.

However, as advice to Microsoft it appears that the LinQ-to-SQL technologies more closely utilizes the same predicates as LinQ-To-Entities . I for one will never go back to anything other than the LinQ strategies, predicates and projections I am currently utilizing. Let's face it the comparer class combined with Except, Intersect, Union and Distinct makes the use of a backend database provider agnostic. After all, it is cheaper to have several middleware servers than even one additional SQL Server.

Good luck on EF but I for one will continue using the Join concepts of LinQ in my middleware servers.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Steve W — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:52:38 GMT

Linq to Sql is an inefficient, bloated pile of poop. Great great for scipt kiddies and those who can't write their own queries, though. DBA's everywhere will party hardy if it gets dropped.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Ross — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:48:22 GMT

This is very disappointing for anyone who has made an investment in learning and utilising LINQ to SQL. LINK to SQL has a major advantage in that it is very lightweight and easily accessible for people who do not need the extra mapping functions of the EF or nHibernate.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Bill — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 20:51:00 GMT

We also have engineered LINQ based solutions for both small and large companies based on LINQ *assuming* MS finally had provided a stable ORM solution. This is looking to be a wrong assumption! How can MS pull the rug out from folks who have now make significant investments in this new technology!? How can MS abandon something that works perfectly fine and after so many years of marketing hype? Worse yet is to leave LINQ to SQL adopter's hanging without a clear concise indication of future direction. We've been burned enough in the past with the flip-flops that most of us now anticipate the worst, which is that LINQ to SQL development will stop, and effectively phased out through lack of support in new products and platforms. Behavior like this is what pushes people away from MS and towards the many alternatives...LAMP here I come.

LINQ to SQL Dead?

From the outside in — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 22:54:53 GMT

What do you think the following post from ADO.NET team blogs says? http://blogs.msdn.com/adonet/archive

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Rohland — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 00:30:51 GMT

We have been very happy with Linq to Sql and have deployed a few solutions already. It is really disappointing that we don't have a clear roadmap from Microsoft that outlines the future of Linq To SQL. For one, I would like to see providers for other popular database technologies such as mySQL.

If EF is the future then I can only request that Microsoft release a series of practical migration guides that outline best practices for migrating projects that use Linq to SQL.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Integrated — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 09:36:21 GMT

Uh, hello the great thing about Linq to SQL was the fact that it is integrated! Let's not criticize others for there skill level since you were there once, eh?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

NYK — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:14:45 GMT

Now I have full confidence that my decision to adopt NHibernate for my whole team is a right one. Other than CLR and ASP.NET, I won't trust any other team under the .Net Framework umbrella.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Kole — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 11:32:26 GMT

I.m dissapointed

If this blog means dead for Linq to Sql, I'm not going to use EF. In addition, in the future I'll not jump into any MS proposed technology, untill it's mature enough and widely accepted

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Sergey Chavlytko — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:49:17 GMT

After Microsoft killed it’s the best product FoxPro - I was in shock. What can I use the next?

Fortunately, Microsoft introduced LINQ in .NET 3.5. It was a big relief for me and thousands other developers who need simple, fast and reliable solutions for our clients in RAD development...

Now you are killing LINQ... I believe decision already has been made. We can only beg ADO.NET team to do it more "human friendly" and transparent for working with data as much as possible.

Please, do it... I will pray for your success and wisdom...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Jamie — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 17:45:48 GMT

"listening to the community"... so you mean EF will be just like vista? wondeful.

i'm just getting into LINQ, and it blows NHibernate out of the water as far as learning curve is concerned. would hate to have to go back.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

AndrewSeven — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 02:59:12 GMT

From the examples I've seen of EF, this lets us go back to writing sql-like statements inside strings instead of writing code.

LINQ to SQL 死或生【译文集锦】

AlexLiu — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 06:50:57 GMT

几个国外大牛对ADO.NET小组发布文章的评论。和大家分享。

Entity Framework Futures

Dennis van der Stelt — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 11:47:26 GMT

A bit late, but it was still in my drafts folder, I just had to finish it. Timothy Mallalieu presented

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Chris — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:05:21 GMT

I hope the new version of EF supports detached(offline) object states

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

naturalight67 — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 21:18:27 GMT

Man, I'm still lovin' ado.net 2.0! I have invested some time and money into Linq2Sql, and I would hate to see it go. I think I can still take one of my books back to the store. I feel like I may have burned some money, but I do not feel burned by the ado.net team.

You guys rock.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

MichaelC — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 23:23:12 GMT

I am so ticked off by this.

I had to beg, plead, bribe, and grovel to get my organization to adopt LINQ-to-SQL and now Microsoft goes and pulls the rug out from under me. Hell, I even got them to buy books on the subject for the development team.

What am I supposed to say to my project manager about this? Hey boss, you know all those man-hours I convinced you to add to the project so the team could master Microsoft's newest, hottest technology? Well... turns out it was all just an April fools joke. Surprise!

Seriously, Microsoft, WHAT... THE... F#@%?!

Dynamic Data Entities Web Application

Nannette Thacker ShiningStar.net — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:22:56 GMT

When you opened up your Visual Studio 2008, you may have seen the ASP.net News on the Start Page promoting

LINQ to SQL pret LINQ to Entities

Ivara blogs — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:44:15 GMT

Vakar ADO.NET komandas blogā atradu interesantu rakstu par LINQ to SQL un LINQ to Entities nākotnes plāniem

The future of LINQ To SQL

Swiss MSDN Team Blog — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:41:08 GMT

I always get the same question about the future of LINQ to SQL. Finally the ADO.NET Team, which is supporting

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Charles Miles — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:34:56 GMT

I really hope you continue to devote resources to Linq to Sql - the posts and comments make it really unclear what 'evolve the product based on feedback' means and make me nervous about its future.

Maybe sometime in the future you can evolve the Entity Framework so that it is as light/simple as Linq to Sql (wow, that sounds like a serious challenge) - but the tough detail is that Linq to Sql is good for lightweight use NOW (generate with SqlMetal, extend with partial classes, query via Linq -> awesome) and is attractive and functional enough it is being used and deployed!

For me Linq to Sql gives a beautiful/light/quick way to get great/easy db access that I would normally hand write sql for and maybe write quick DAL classes for - it is NOT subbing for nHibernate or other complete ORM products. Hard to imageine how ties to the Entity Framework help me quickly make a lightweight DAL for a simple application.

I hope Linq to Sql is evolved, supported and a first class technology going forward.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

David Jade — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:27:04 GMT

I too am disappointed with this decision as we are heavily invested in LINQ to SQL in such a way that makes transitioning to LINQ to Entities impossible, due to L2E’s lack of flexibility and subpar support for advanced SQL generation. I really hope that you do listen to the community and realize that for many of us LINQ to SQL provides an alternative yet valuable and lightweight way to access SQL data when a full-blown ORM is not desired (or when someone else’s idea of what an ORM should be doesn’t match our needs). In this regard I don’t view LINQ to SQL as a competitor to LINQ to Entities but rather as an alternative for those who want a solution that is lightweight and flexible with superior close to the metal SQL query generation.

While it is clearly necessary to invest in LINQ to Entities in its current state, it seems to me that it is evolving in a different direction than what LINQ to SQL was designed to fulfill. Along the way many design tradeoffs in L2E are being made, some of which are making L2E less flexible and less capable than the current version of LINQ to SQL is.

For starters, I would encourage you to take a long and hard look at what is currently possible with LINQ to SQL that is not possible with LINQ to Entities. Some of this is outlined here: http://mosesofegypt.net/post/LINQ-to-Entities-what-is-not-supported.aspx (especially the current limitations on LINQ query expression evaluations and the boundaries between client-side method invocations and server-side query generation). While workarounds may be possible many of these require trade-offs that the current LINQ to SQL does not require (i.e. more client-side evaluation and less intelligent SQL generation).

I would also encourage you to look at Rob Conery’s work on the MVC Storefront (http://blog.wekeroad.com/mvc-storefront) with LINQ to SQL to see how he is using it to build a data access layer, particularly this post: http://blog.wekeroad.com/mvc-storefront/asp-net-mvc-mvc-storefront-part-2 . His series of posts in particular show just how flexible LINQ to SQL can be.

If L2E is to supplant L2S in the long run then it must step up to the plate and enable the same scenarios and flexibility that LINQ to SQL currently enables, otherwise we as the users of these technologies will be at a net loss in flexibility and design choice. Until L2E can take on these scenarios with the same flexibility I really don’t want to hear about LINQ to SQL being a dead-end technology. That to me sounds simply premature.

David Jade

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Ben Baird — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:43:19 GMT

I left Microsoft development tools behind starting with the debut of .NET because of this attitude toward developers. Glad to see my decision being reinforced :)

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Luke Breuer — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:08:55 GMT

I am disappointed with the decision to obsolete Linq to SQL. I hope you follow up on your promise to "listen to customers" and reconsider the decision to drop this lightweight-but-useful technology based on the massive amount of feedback you are getting.

Microsoft has a propensity to ignore the need for lightweight tooling and technology. Compare ASP.NET WebForms to ASP.NET MVC. Microsoft actually recognized the desire for a lighter-weight framework that purposely does _less_ for the programmer. Less framework tends to mean more flexibility -- this can be a good thing. Please do not leave developers such as me and all the people above stuck in the mud of overbearing frameworks that enforce constraints that are detrimental to certain use cases.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

sgvlfogca — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 18:57:50 GMT

970UBo <a href="http://ngbihyiuxzyu.com/">ngbihyiuxzyu</a>, [url=http://rwfdobsnipvf.com/]rwfdobsnipvf[/url], [link=http://wnjusujqtjtw.com/]wnjusujqtjtw[/link], http://ihsiybnbewwr.com/

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

ScottK — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:12:26 GMT

I have found LINQ to SQL to be an incredibly lightweight yet powerful tool. It is horribly mischaracterized as a RAD tool (even by the ADO team) but used appropriately can be extremely flexible and conducive to developing domain centered applications. There are people out there who understand the potential of this technology (stand up and take a bow, Ian) and MS should let people like these take the product forward, whether as an MS offering or not.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Mark Kamoski — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 23:36:14 GMT

Is the Entity Framework out of Beta? I just Googled for it and came up with Beta 2, circa 2007. Gah.

Linq to Entites VS Linq To Sql

LINQ in Action roller — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 23:39:23 GMT

All -- Please help. I keep hearing about how Linq-To-Entities is now preferred to Linq-To-Sql, such as

ADO.NET v LINQ to SQL

Chad# — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 00:12:47 GMT

So with the recent news of LINQ to SQL going DOA a lot of those who have developed applications around

#.think.in infoDose #6 (3rd Nov - 8th Nov)

#.think.in — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 01:33:00 GMT

#.think.in infoDose #6 (3rd Nov - 8th Nov)

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Chad Moran — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 07:06:19 GMT

I recently wrote a article regarding ADO.NET EF v LINQ to SQL which you can find here...

http://weblogs.asp.net/chadmoran/archive/2008/11/09/ado-net-v-linq-to-sql.aspx

Microsoft I think this is a terrible mistake. I think what you need to do instead of having EF v L2S you should have EF -extend- L2S instead of having it replace. You're wasting everyone's time, money and hard work with your inconsistencies and constant mind-changing.

Get your act together, and soon. A lot of people are now paying attention to Microsoft as a platform for development with a lot of the good things you've done lately like having MVC, MEF and ASP.NET AJAX being developed on CodePlex. Now is the last time you want to mess things up.

The Estrangement of LINQ to SQL

BusinessRx Reading List — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 05:13:01 GMT

<p>Tim Mallalieu, PM of LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities, recently <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/adonet/archive/2008/10/29/update-on-linq-to-sql-and-linq-to-entities-roadmap.aspx"

The Estrangement of LINQ to SQL

K. Scott Allen — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:12:48 GMT

Tim Mallalieu, PM of LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities, recently announced: “…as of .NET 4.0 the Entity...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Peter — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:17:27 GMT

I can't believe that you are going to drop L2S just like this after 1 year.

It's quick, intuitive, powerful and just working.

Developers invested a lot of time in learning this technology and implementing it in new projects.

I'm strongly convinced that you should invest in this technology, implementing new features in L2S that developers have been asking.

If you confirm that you are going to drop this technology, I suggest everyone just to move to NHibernate, that now supports even Linq To NHibernate, and at least it's open source and can be carried on by the community.

I hope something you might change (again) your mind about L2S.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Kaveh Shahbazian — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:06:53 GMT

This behavior of abandoning technologies so carelessly, bring high level of doubtfulness in using the new technologies. For example I have not started to use WF and WCF yet. What if they are disappear in next version? Microsoft always have technology collisions because being property is somehow in conflict with being productive. LINQ to SQL is a very well designed piece and I see why it must be abandoned: It is too high level to be totally dependent on SQL Server!

And is not WF a rival for BizTalk? And WCF a rival for Windows Azureus service oriented design?

This kind of decisions makes .NET development too expensive and too risky to rely on in enterprise.

I really hope Microsoft "understand" this.

Best Regards

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

John Walker — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:47:51 GMT

Cruel joke, right. Seriously. Punch in the gut. Thanks.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Ike — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 06:42:08 GMT

As was stated above, I believe that EF is a superior product and I am using it successfully in production applications with one exception. Linq to SQL gives me the ability (whereas Linq to EF does not) to add a table-valued function invocation to a Linq statement and join that table with other tables, etc. in my Linq statement. This allows me to do something very powerful that I utilize extensively (and that isn't available natively). I have a set of TVFs that simply convert an XML input into a table of the specified SQL type and, when joined with another data set, allows me to one-up the SQL "IN" functionality.

Long story short...ax Linq to SQL, but please, please, PLEASE don't throw me in that briar patch! No seriously, please allow me to invoke table-valued functions using Linq to Entities (which I CAN'T DO TODAY!!! @$!#).

M$ rocks...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

ray linn — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:27:28 GMT

I don't like the Entity framework at all. If I had to make a decision to choose one of the ORMs , why I do not choose Nhibernate over Entity Framework, It is stable, compatible with hibernate.

LINQ to SQL is a baby , i would like to see the improvement on it, instead of a totally new framework. I hope the feature if we could just use the general collection for one-many or many-many mapping...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Dan Waldner — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:59:28 GMT

Let me ask you a question - if you guys are not going to continue technologies past the first generation, how the hell are we supposed to figure out which technology to base our decisions on if you're just going to yank them out from under us.

We've developed our newest technologies based on the lightweight Linq to SQL framework and now you're telling us that it's not going to be supported in 4.0?

You have no idea how many people you've succeeded in pissing off.

Microsoft favorisiert Entity Framework vor Linq2Sql

.net positiv — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:28:18 GMT

Microsoft favorisiert Entity Framework vor Linq2Sql

LINQ to SQL..... she is dead, deceased .. just something in the past

Zlatan's Blog [MVP SharePoint] — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:03:31 GMT

Following bunch of announcements about .NET 4.0, ADO.NET team makes a not so surprising announcement

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Mike_BB — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 13:00:40 GMT

1 problem - if i have table t1 (id int primary key) and generate it"s pk by sequence, not identity, that attribute use?

StoreGeneratedPattern="Computed" not use in case primary key!!!

2 Why absent partial void Insert ...How customize insertd, update, delete?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

James — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:48:50 GMT

I have nothing constructive to add to this other than the fact that you've totally screwed over lots of my projects..... awesome... thanks Microsoft.

WAR between Entity Framework Vs LINQ to SQL

Pedro Rainho — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:50:12 GMT

WAR between Entity Framework Vs LINQ to SQL

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Jason Short — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 06:34:26 GMT

I think the comments here will bear out that a lot of people never understood LINQ 2 SQL to be a temp solution or a partial implemenation.

http://visualstudiomagazine.com/features/article.aspx?editorialsid=2583

From that post it sounds like everyone was supposed to know it was a "risky" technology and an early adopter only short term strategy.

I knew that because I went to the PDC and TechED 2 years ago. But no one writing those pretty cover articles for Visual Studio Mag or MSDN ever said "don't do this if your project is going to live more than 1 year". I have been yelling for that entire two years that people needs to look at EF as their long term solution, but no one ever listened and generally gave me a ton of opinions why L2S was "superior"...

I personally have no problems with EF. It works about as well as L2S, but lacks the docs or community support. Maybe that will change now that is a finally THE access method.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Mike_BB — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:55:27 GMT

Hi! How include master table in group expression? E.g. in AdventureWorks: vaster table Person.Contact, detail table Sales.SalesOrderHeader. Group

context = new EF.AdventureWorksEntities();

var query = (from p in context.SalesOrderHeaders group p by p.Contact.ContactID into g select g)

and we write

var result =

from grp in query

select new

{

id = grp.Key,

Number = grp.Count(),

FirstName= (from s in grp

where s.Contact.ContactID == grp.Key

select s.Contact.FirstName).First<string>()}

In LINQ OK! But in EF s.Contact == NULL!!!

Working with Data in Silverlight 2 (Entity Framework, Ado.Net Data Services, and DataGrid)

Ian Blackburn — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 21:48:54 GMT

Working with Data in Silverlight 2 (Entity Framework, Ado.Net Data Services, and DataGrid)

What Is The Future To "LINQ To SQL"

Bayer White, Connected Systems MVP — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 00:14:16 GMT

What Is The Future To "LINQ To SQL"

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Mike_BB — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:33:18 GMT

How add in ConceptualModels business object (EntitySet) that no direct mapping in database? E.g. business object with grouping. Simple solution - create view in database not use!

I am sorry my bad english!

Lots of stuff happening, and a bit of philosophy.

Daniel2ThePoint — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:20:31 GMT

I'm not dead or gone, just had a lot of work to do. Have started to record a lot of screen casts

LINQ 2 SQL udah mau modar???? Benarkah??

henryjwr — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:45:31 GMT

Busyettt...............bener nih LINQ 2 SQL nggak ada kelajutan Road Mapnya.... gimana nih om MIC &

considerable issues moving from Linq to SQL to Entity Framework

Thomas DeMille Interactive — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 20:11:36 GMT

considerable issues moving from Linq to SQL to Entity Framework

My Visual Studio 2010 presentation for ICC

VB for Dummies — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 23:18:33 GMT

Just finished up a presentation on Visual Studio 2010 for ICC's MS Dev special interest group. A good time was had by all. I used the card deck that is in the Training Kit, and added a few salient slides. We had a lot of coversation about Linq, WPF and

My Visual Studio 2010 presentation for ICC

VB for Dummies — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 23:32:41 GMT

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Dave R. — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 16:58:10 GMT

It's plain from all the feedback here and elsewhere that many people find LINQ to SQL powerful and simple, whereas the Entity Framework is currently not a plausible alternative.

With this in mind, would you please reconsider? If you obsolete such a promising technology just because it wasn't built by your team, you risk alienating many thousands of early adopters who find that it fits their needs and who were looking forward to future development.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Moon — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 22:03:51 GMT

Linq to Entities doesn't even support the Create Function Import of a stored procedure that returns nothing! If so, where is it?

There are tutorials and videos all over the web for linq to sql but next to nothing on linq to entities.

I am so frustrated with this technology. It has put me weeks behind in development. I rewrote all of my linq to sql over into linq to entities and getting past the stored procedures has been a nightmare. It is impossible!

And I can't get support on it. There's not even an asp.net forum dedicated to linq to entities. Not that anyone ever answers you over there anyway.

Also, try combining ado.net with linq to entities. The changes you make in running a stored procedure are not updated in the entitie model and now you're retrieving old data before the sproc was run.

Also, forget updating your entity model without entirely deleting it and starting over. It simply has so many limitations that it doesn't update the model entirely and only on a few things. If you change your database, just delete the model and start over. So forget any customizations.

Please put some effort into this technology and "fix" it NOW to run with stored procedures. Give us a patch. Were we told it we were just microsoft's free beta testers? Because this technology does not work and forget trying to use it in a real world application. Do I have to wait for 4.0 to actually get a technology that works?

By then, I'll have moved to a working ORM solution and when that happens you won't find me coming back to it.

How can you release a technology as a "working solution" when it doesn't even support something as simple as running ANY type of stored procedure?

不得不说几句，从

TerryLee — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:47:24 GMT

原因近日不断看到有关“LINQ已死”，“LINQ玩完了吧”的言论，甚至于更有牛人说出“程序开发最终会回到本机代码上”，暂不说这些言论是否正确，且先来看看各位的惊人言论，下面仅摘录部分：言论1...

不得不为LINQ说几句话，驳“LINQ已死”论

TerryLee — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 20:31:28 GMT

近日不断看到有关“LINQ已死”，“LINQ玩完了吧”的言论，甚至于更有牛人说出“程序开发最终会回到本机代码上”，于是便有了本文：

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Allen — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:58:56 GMT

This is such a horrible idea and it smacks heavily of a new person coming into a position and wanting to create his own 'baby' as it were. The linq to sql was a really good idea that deserves to be improved on while the entity framework is an overly cumbersome unit of garbage that is of questionable need. Why not just improve the linq to sql and keep moving it forward instead of yet again creating something new and forcing us all to switch to it?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

mknopf — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:01:05 GMT

I recently started on a Proof-of-Concept project using ADO.NET Entity Framework. The project had an existing simple data model which had tables, views, stored procedures, and user defined functions.

After many many hours of frustration with using Entity Framework I finally reached a breaking point, where the execution of a simple stored procedure required the installation of an "Extension Library" and a large block of code necessary to execute each Stored Proc. This was and is absurd, Linq to SQL makes this very easy (along with everything else).

I ripped out all the entity framework code and replaced it with Linq to SQL, in a fraction of the time I had accomplished everything i set out to do with the Proof-of-Concept. This proved to me that Entity Framework is not production ready and I will not use it in the future until I see sufficient proof that this is no longer the case.

PLEASE DO NOT KILL LINQ TO SQL!!!! You will be making a HUGE mistake.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Al — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:23:34 GMT

Could somebody translate this blog post into English, please?

Linq to sql 微软不主动更新了

SAL — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 06:42:58 GMT

Linqtosql微软不主动更新了，最近比外国的技术博客上看到的。不知道这信息是否真实。但是本人刚刚有了解了一下linqtosql，他对存储过程的支持不太好，不能返回数据集，如：我的一个通用...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Ben — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:28:07 GMT

Hibernate and EF are only good for bloated development environments who have no competative advantage in the market. Personally i think productivity in the industry has dived in the last 5-6 years . LINQ2SQL was a nice solution that fitted 90% of the apps that we need to write not the huge monsters that need massive development and support teams for little business gain except to make developers/architects good that they have made the "perfect product".

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

TT — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 04:06:41 GMT

The lack of response from the ADO.NET team is curious at best... You guys come off as a bunch of aristocrats.

If some new MS products are built on top of entity framework, why aren't the dao layer pluggable so that you could use Linq2sql or NHibernate for that sake. Seems like bad design

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

TT — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 04:06:49 GMT

The lack of response from the ADO.NET team is curious at best... You guys come off as a bunch of aristocrats.

If some new MS products are built on top of entity framework, why aren't the dao layer pluggable so that you could use Linq2sql or NHibernate for that sake. Seems like bad design

Entity Framework and LINQ to SQL

Bill Blogs in C# — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:13:13 GMT

I’d hoped to completely avoid any discussion surrounding the future (or futures) of Entity Framework

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Chris Williams — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 06:10:13 GMT

Amen to mknopf.

I can't believe that you're putting out any kind of "the future is Entiity Framework" message when EF in it's current incarnation is so brain dead. Am I just not supposed to develop any sort of data application until you get your sh*t together?

Stored procedures for example! I can't tell my dba not to use them.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

jay greasley — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:42:09 GMT

Is this not just a nail in the coffin of closed source software?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Olivier — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:38:01 GMT

If LinqToSql was to not be supported any more, would-it be possible to have its source code on CodePlex?

Or at least, to open all this "internal classes" programming model so that third-parties could integrate other vendors databases.

When looking at the way LinqToSql is made, it is obvious that extensibility points are provided. Just make them public!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

vaccac — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:13:10 GMT

This is going to make so many people switch to NHibernate

ADO.NET Entity Framework OR LINQ to SQL

emvik.net — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:42:14 GMT

ADO.NET Entity Framework OR LINQ to SQL

emvik.net — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:50:53 GMT

ADO.NET Entity Framework OR LINQ to SQL

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Himadri Banerjee — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:31:13 GMT

I think the Project lead of ADO.NET should be fired. Is this a freaking JOKE?? What in the hell are these people thinking? They should give back the L2S to the C# team ( Hats off to them for creating something so wonderful) or the ASP.NET Team. Don't you guys even learn from history? Do you all work for the same damn company? Why kill the most beautiful thing that was created. L2S was simple easy to learn and more people switched to MS platform because of that. This is a crime to tell us now to switch to EF model...Why would you force us like this? Just because you did not create it? Man you guys should not be in the IT business and go flip burgers and I personally will tell all our channel partners and everyone to switch to Non MS platform if you drop L2S and make us use EF model.

Кажется у LINQ to SQL будут проблемы...

Russian SQL Server Club — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:38:39 GMT

То есть это не конец, но внимания ему, видимо, будет уделяться совсем немного.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Phil Karras — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:55:57 GMT

What part of,

"We are listening to customers regarding LINQ to SQL and will continue to evolve the product based on

feedback we receive from the community as well."

are we not reading, seeing, understanding? It looks to me that while they are working on "Entity Framework" they will continue to work on LINQ to SQL, though perhaps not as "important" to them as EF.

-pk

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Mike — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 00:39:58 GMT

@pk (and anyone else who does not understand coporate speak):

Read the book Weasel Words or Death Sentences, books about communication in corporations. ALL 'official' posts on this issue are filled with these weasel words. The bottom line is: Microsoft WILL NOT DEVELOP LINQ TO SQL.

Sure, they are "fully committed", "listening to feedback", "evaluating the best fit", but NOWHERE does it say that they are going to make many-to-many mapping possible in LINQ to SQL, or opening the LINQ to SQL provider. NOWHERE!

It's not happening folks. So now what? We need to put pressure on Microsoft. They have two choices:

A - start an agile and independent team to develop LINQ to SQL in the same fashion as the ASP.NET MVC project

B - Open source the whole thing on Codeplex, we'll do it ourselves.

But don't count on Microsoft, they decided to f*ck their customers. Thanks for nothing Tim Mallalieu!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Tom — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 08:46:11 GMT

A whole book on corporate-speak?! Read the reviews on Amazon, and you'll see that the book belongs to the category of: "Here are 3 pages that would make a pretty good magazine article; now let me pad it out to 200 pages so I can put a book on my resume."

If anyone still have trouble believing that LINQ to SQL is dead, I urge you to compare the statement above to the statement that came out when Flight Simulator (Microsoft's longest-running product) was cancelled two weeks ago. It's seriously uncanny; they even use the word "fully committed." Laying off the whole team, that's a funny way of showing your commitment to the product ...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Ike — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:19:16 GMT

Just wanted to cast my vote for support of table-valued functions in EF v2. That's the only thing I used LINQ to SQL for and, even today, I would rather that functionality be in EF. If LINQ to SQL is on it's way out. I can only assume/hope that MS will move function support to EF.

Thanks in advance...

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Rich — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 02:22:04 GMT

At the very least, keep LINQ to SQL in VS2010...maintained or not. Are you saying that it will be excluded from VS2010? Or that it will not be further enhanced in VS2010?

KEEP LINQ to SQL!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Scott — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:16:48 GMT

When I first started using LINQ to SQL, I thought "FINALLY, Microsoft has built a data access model that does what I need it to do."

And now you want me to use EF instead? WHY? EF is harder to work with, a heck of a lot heavier, and it's slower. And it requires I write code with embedded strings in it? Are you kidding? EF is clearly inferior to L2S. So how is it that EF is now the "preferred model"?

You guys are really, REALLY pissing me off.

What ASP.NET MVC Can Learn From Ruby on Rails

Kevin Pang — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:08:15 GMT

What ASP.NET MVC Can Learn From Ruby on Rails

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

ken — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 00:06:41 GMT

MS needs to develop a flexible, living, cross-platform, quick-to-develop Data Access layer. L2S has it's limitations, and I never found a quick easy way to update it when the data model changed, which it does frequently in a development environment. Additionally, I find myself using MySQL more and more for web site development and L2MySql would be nice.

Whatever they come up with, they had better do it quick before too many more developers get used to L2S and then feel abandoned when it goes the way of Foxpro, BOB and playsforsure.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

X Chen — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 04:35:57 GMT

Everybody likes linq to sql to some degree. If MS fix some of the problems, linq to sql could be the best data access component from microsoft.

Don't let it go. I am not confident EF could be as good.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Janus007 — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:10:23 GMT

What exactly has ADO.NET team contributed with in the long run?

It seems like everything they try to invent they invent as complicated and heavy-weight as possible.

Linq to Datasets - what is that? Writing Linq to some legacy old style DataSets - give me one reason? Just keep the DataSets as is to support backward compability. What happened with Linq to Objects instead? Ohh... I forgot, Linq to DataSets should be capable of doing some strange things that was never intended.

ADO.NET DataServices - what is that? Deploy dataservices over the Internet, don't make me laugh *LOL*

What is up with that team?

And now they are fighting Linq To SQL and trying to convince people that L2E is the preferred way - yeah yeah.. still laughing.

Wonder how many have tried the new "“Table Splitting”: Mapping multiple entity types to the same table."

Again I must laugh, why the heck is that such a big issue? It shouldn't be anything to even think about, it should just be there intuitively. Why even think about how the data should be modelled from the relational model to object model, why not just drop all the strange rules and just model the object entities and let the mapping do some magic. I can continue, what about updating and inserting etc. etc. uuuhhh you can't insert an object in a disconnected environment because bla bla... because what? Useless information if you ask me, it should just be something implicit instead of all those strange rules. Hint: If you come back with an object into a disconnected datacontext, then the datacontext should reconize the object - how hard would that be to create?

But nono, instead they try to build strange technologies that very few people need.

And the worst thing, they try to fight L2S before even L2E is mature enough for some real projects.

NB: I could be wrong, I just googled self-tracking entities, they could cover what I'm talking about, but nevertheless it's the whole concept that irritates me *LOL*

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Kenny — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:07:01 GMT

So, the people pissed that the time and money spent learning L2S -- you people honestly believe 100% of that is gone? Even 75%? Wow. I find it difficult to believe you guys are that ignorant.

You learned about anonymous types. You learned lambda's. You learned how to handle things. Your *code* shouldn't require that much more effort to go to L2E.

Get your panties out of the bunch and calm down. Getting all emotional only makes you look like a kid who can't handle the real world.

L2E is fantastic. I started learning it over L2S. At the moment I /only/ use L2S if I'm writing a throw-away application -- otherwise it's L2E. The skills I learn go back and forth. That simple.

<Arnold> Stop whining </Arnold>

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Kenny — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:07:26 GMT

So, the people pissed that the time and money spent learning L2S -- you people honestly believe 100% of that is gone? Even 75%? Wow. I find it difficult to believe you guys are that ignorant.

You learned about anonymous types. You learned lambda's. You learned how to handle things. Your *code* shouldn't require that much more effort to go to L2E.

Get your panties out of the bunch and calm down. Getting all emotional only makes you look like a kid who can't handle the real world.

L2E is fantastic. I started learning it over L2S. At the moment I /only/ use L2S if I'm writing a throw-away application -- otherwise it's L2E. The skills I learn go back and forth. That simple.

<Arnold> Stop whining </Arnold>

Microsoft Kills LINQ to SQL ?

Articles — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 08:22:10 GMT

Microsoft Kills LINQ to SQL? For the last couple of months, I've been hearing all kinds of complains

Microsoft Kills LINQ to SQL ?

Articles — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:27:44 GMT

For the last couple of months, I've been hearing all kinds of complains, cries, nervous breakdowns

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Petr Antos — Wed, 13 May 2009 13:19:02 GMT

dont worry ... L2S was only lightweight wrapper around relational database approach, allowing only simple automatic persistence of simple inheritance trees; simply because of LINQ - as this has nothing to do particulary with databases only. And L2S has its flaws for multitier usage, and is not intended to be enhanced (as it is impossible to manage for VERY HIGHER level "REAL" ORM). So Entity Framework WILL integrate good things from L2S, reuse its querying capabilities inside (although its query language originaly was not powered by LINQ?) and as making "really good" ORM (allowing to forgot for SQL completelly) is nobel-price task IMHO, it is simply very, very, very much complex to do it well, than simple L2S wrapper - so be patient, and *believe* ...

Linq2SQL's 'big brother' - Entity Framework

VistaDB.Net Blog — Sat, 16 May 2009 09:28:34 GMT

Linq2SQL's 'big brother' - Entity Framework

Microsoft killing LINQ to SQL?

VistaDB.Net Blog — Sat, 16 May 2009 09:34:01 GMT

Microsoft killing LINQ to SQL?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

medyum — Wed, 20 May 2009 20:25:30 GMT

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Medyum — Fri, 22 May 2009 13:36:14 GMT

You learned about anonymous types. You learned lambda's. You learned how to handle things. Your *code* shouldn't require that much more effort to go to L2E.

Get your panties out of the bunch and calm down. Getting all emotional only makes you look like a kid who can't handle the real world.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Quinn — Fri, 22 May 2009 18:36:39 GMT

L2S is a great solution for our needs. Why not evolve something that works so well and is as popular as L2S?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Lioncall — Wed, 27 May 2009 06:52:08 GMT

I suggest implementing a Repository pattern to simplify transition between NHibernate,L2S and L2E. See http://www.codeplex.com/backgroundmotion

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

PJB — Wed, 27 May 2009 21:13:25 GMT

This reminds me of the DAO, RDO, ADO debates. Look like MSFT never learns, and we continue to dive head first into all of their offerings.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

XУЛИГAH — Sun, 31 May 2009 04:14:26 GMT

Информация полезная. Спасибо. Хотелось бы только обновлений почаще

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Вадим — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 01:13:38 GMT

У меня очень скоро в bookmarks место закончится, но я буду рад добавлять с вашего блога и далее ссылочки на интересные темы!

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

出会い — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 04:48:35 GMT

ヒマだょ…誰かかまってぉ…会って遊んだりできる人募集！とりあえずメール下さい☆　uau-love@docomo.ne.jp

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

小向美奈子 — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 04:35:31 GMT

話題の小向美奈子ストリップを隠し撮り！入念なボディチェックをすり抜けて超小型カメラで撮影した神動画がアップ中！期間限定配信の衝撃的映像を見逃すな

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

小向美奈子 — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 05:04:21 GMT

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

家出掲示板 — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 04:46:58 GMT

カワイイ子ほど家出してみたくなるようです。家出掲示板でそのような子と出会ってみませんか？彼女たちは夕食をおごってあげるだけでお礼にHなご奉仕をしてくれちゃったりします

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

右脳左脳 — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 04:58:31 GMT

あなたは右脳派？もしくは左脳派？隠されたあなたの性格分析が3分で出来ちゃう診断サイトの決定版！合コンや話のネタにも使える右脳左脳チェッカーを試してみよう

My Visual Studio 2010 presentation for ICC

Bill Sempf — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:04:18 GMT

My Visual Studio 2010 presentation for ICC

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

セレブラブ — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 04:13:43 GMT

セレブラブでは性欲のある男性を募集しています。セフレパートナーを探している20代・30代の女性たちが多数登録されています。セレブと遊びたい、Hがしたいという方は無料登録からどうぞ

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

逆援助 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:16:50 GMT

セレブ達は一般の人達とは接する機会もなく、その出会う唯一の場所が「逆援助倶楽部」です。男性はお金、女性はSEXを要求する場合が多いようです。これは女性に圧倒的な財力があるから成り立つことの出来る関係ではないでしょうか？

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

救援部 — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:10:52 GMT

貴方のオ○ニーライフのお手伝い、救援部でHな見せたがり女性からエロ写メ、ムービーをゲットしよう！近所の女の子なら実際に合ってHな事ができちゃうかも！？夏に向けて開放的になっている女の子と遊んじゃおう

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

出会い — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 04:48:18 GMT

まったぁ〜りしたデートがしたいです☆結構いつでもヒマしてます♪　m-g-j@docomo.ne.jp　年齢と名前くらいは入れてくれるとメール返信しやすいかも…

LINQ to SQL: It Lives! (sort of)

VS2010学习 — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 21:42:00 GMT

A lot of people are confused about whether or not they should use LINQ to SQL , because the word on the

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Денис — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:09:02 GMT

Можно и поспорить по этому вопросу, ведь только в споре проявляется истина. :)

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

sohbeti — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:34:44 GMT

perfect this blog, kameralı sesli sohbet chat girişi.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

hikaye — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 22:16:14 GMT

L2S is a great solution for our needs. Why not evolve something that works so well and is as popular as L2S?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Freerider — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:21:24 GMT

Any real world solutions using EF by now?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Виталий — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:25:22 GMT

Любопытно! Только не могу понять как часто обновляется этот блог? :)

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

aöf — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 23:23:53 GMT

Very good, congratulations article

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

cinsellik — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:41:06 GMT

I am grateful to you for this great content.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

radyo dinle — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 16:51:20 GMT

I am grateful to you for this great content.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

sikiş — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:38:34 GMT

Very good, congratulations article ,<a href="http://w3.org">w </a>

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

ssk sorgulama — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:00:43 GMT

a very good article da a very useful information ..thank you has to share this information.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

zerrin egeliler — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:20:15 GMT

L2S is a great solution for our needs. Why not evolve something that works so well and is as popular as L2S?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Damiano Fusco — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:23:54 GMT

I want to answer to Dimtry. Not sure if this is what you meant. But from in LINQ to SQL you can map a table from a dataontext to another database by using the SQL 3 part syntax/prefix in the table attribute of the entitity. I tried this and works well both reading and writing data.

[Table(Name = "MyOtherDatabase.Schema.MyOtherTable")]

public class MyOtherTable

{

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Иван Евсеев — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:14:33 GMT

Хм... :) Вы бы знали что про Вас пишут в других блогах :)

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Riaba — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:23:53 GMT

Очень интересный блог получился

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Seth Livingston — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 00:24:23 GMT

I'm not happy to see something simple abandoned for something more complex. We don't need more features and more books and more configuration files; we just need APIs that are simple and intuitive.

I appreciate Microsoft chiming in on these comments, but I have little faith that you can take a product like EF v1 and make it more simple--how often does that actually happen?

I advocated the use of L2S on a major, major rewrite for a leading retailer. The L2S is very isolated, so replacing it won't cause a lot of pain, but I would be sorry to see it go--it's so simple and easy to understand.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

cinsiyet belirleme — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:26:57 GMT

Learning from Down Under promotion videos

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

erkek cocuk için — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:28:24 GMT

Are there known vulnerabilities that allow uploading of php files to a server

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

someone — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:21:55 GMT

It is almost a year. Still no updates on LINQ to SQL. Not even any new articles on the blog about LINQ to SQL. It is all about EF. I guess the writing is on the wall. Even though MS is not writing it. At the same time they are not preventing the chaos around LINQ to SQL being dead.

The King is dead. Long live the King.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

telefon dinleme — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 03:03:54 GMT

L2S is a great solution for our needs. Why not evolve something that works so well and is as popular as L2S?

telefon dinleme

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Jason Alexander — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:08:45 GMT

This is just sad, and a little ridiculous, quite honestly. L2S is great, and you guys (more than anyone else) should know you can't release something and then, basically, drop support.

I'm seriously disappointed, and disgusted, by how you guys have handled this.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Matthijs — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:54:30 GMT

Just been slowly working my way through a very small project as a means to learning Linq.

Then I get to needing a left join; and start looking up how to implement...

Then I find these kinds of comment.

Well, for me, Linq IS dead.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Andrey — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:49:17 GMT

Matthijs, what’s wrong with left join in LINQ to SQL? Use combination of join and DefaultIfEmpty() for that.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Roman — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 20:51:17 GMT

SubSonic 3 is built with a similar ideology to LINQ-to-SQL, and with some community effort could really replace L2SQL. At the moment it's a bit rough around the edges though.

Also good if you want your app to be (gasp!) portable, since it actually runs under Mono.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

medyum — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 08:15:49 GMT

Thank you very much for everything

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Matt Slay — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:28:16 GMT

Now you guys all know how us Visual FoxPro devs felt when MS killed VFP. They will drop a technology whenever they get ready, and they DO NOT care what the impact is. They are in control of it all. What else are we going do to?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

zoldello — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:58:35 GMT

Give me one Microsoft ORM to learn and just one or give me a URL discussing Microsoft's competition.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Travis — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:35:11 GMT

Thanks for wasting the last year of my life learning Linq to Sql. I really liked it and recommended it to colleagues. You have lost what little trust I had in Microsoft.

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Medyum — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:50:24 GMT

this is very nice blog,thank you for all

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

Medyum — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:50:58 GMT

this is very nice blog,thank you for all

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

nazar — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:51:13 GMT

thanks for all it is very nice blog

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

kozmetik — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:13:32 GMT

L2S is a great solution for our needs. Why not evolve something that works so well and is as popular as L2S?

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

0 km Araba — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:54:31 GMT

You learned about anonymous types. You learned lambda's. You learned how to handle things. Your *code* shouldn't require that much more effort to go to L2E.

Get your panties out of the bunch and calm down. Getting all emotional only makes you look like a kid who can't handle the real world

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

araba — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:55:36 GMT

You learned about anonymous types. You learned lambda's. You learned how to handle things. Your *code* shouldn't require that much more effort to go to L2E.

Get your panties out of the bunch and calm down. Getting all emotional only makes you look like a kid who can't handle the real world

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

magazin — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:56:32 GMT

You learned about anonymous types. You learned lambda's. You learned how to handle things. Your *code* shouldn't require that much more effort to go to L2E.

Get your panties out of the bunch and calm down. Getting all emotional only makes you look like a kid who can't handle the real world

re: Update on LINQ to SQL and LINQ to Entities Roadmap

tekzalim — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:23:55 GMT

veryy good