Microsoft engineers have been working on a 64-bit version of SQL Server since 1997. When it ships next year, it will give Microsoft customers a more powerful platform for their most demanding applications. "It's on our server road map," says John Benzinger, VP of IT with FreeMarkets Inc., which uses SQL Server and Oracle databases. "Having more of your database in memory makes things faster, and that's what everyone's goal is."

After that comes Yukon. Microsoft officials say Yukon will offer compelling features, such as a common language programming environment, fewer configuration knobs, and a uniform set of management apps. Both Yukon and .Net server will be available in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, and Yukon will be tuned to take advantage of capabilities in .Net Server, including deeper XML support, making the combination a foundation for Web services.

Wish List Which attributes does your company consider important for future database purchases? 1. Reliability 2. Price/ performance 3. Scalability 4. Ease of administration 5. Total cost of ownership 6. Vendor's customer service and support 7. Internal standards 8. Advanced features 9. Vendor reputation Note: Based on a 1-9 scale where 1 is most important and 9 least important. Data: InformationWeek/Morgan Stanley software and database survey of 636 business-technology professionals, June 2002

Yukon will advance Microsoft's push into data warehousing. SQL Server 2000's Data Transformation Services for data extraction, transformation, and loading are getting an overhaul. "We're basically re-architecting the internals," says general manager of business intelligence Baker. "We're patenting some stuff. There will be orders of magnitude improvement in speed." The upgrade will have five new data-mining algorithms, including those for market-basket and time-series analyses.

All the tweaks, however, may count for naught if Microsoft can't maintain the perception that lower cost is one of its chief advantages. Oracle last week released the results of a report by Input, a research firm, showing that it costs less to run packaged business applications on Oracle's database than on SQL Server. "It doesn't matter how you break it out," says Oracle VP Shimp. "If you look at licensing costs, we're less. If you look at the cost of managing the system, we're less. If you look at total system cost, we're literally half the price."

Those results should probably be tempered, though, with the knowledge that Oracle itself commissioned and paid for the Input study. "That doesn't jibe with any of my experiences at all," says Robert Hughes, a product manager for internal systems with Ceridian Corp., which supports human-resources and payroll operations for other businesses, and which uses both SQL Server and Oracle databases. Hughes says SQL Server is generally cheaper because it costs less to license, comes with management tools that cost extra from Oracle, and runs on Intel systems.

Yet pricing is fluid, and Gartner analyst Colleen Graham says it's typical of Microsoft to raise prices as its technology improves. If SQL Server's costs increase at the same time its features improve, database buyers may find that the selection process has gotten easier in one respect--but harder in another.

Photo of Damien Bean by Laura Kleinhenz/Corbis Saba