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

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 ...

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

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!

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.

@Jens,

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

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.

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

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

"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

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

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

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

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

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