Seeking SQL Tool

April 10, 2007 10:09 AM

What free tool from Microsoft or otherwise will let me peruse and edit a SQL Server 2005 database?

For years I've used Enterprise Manager (version 8.0) to look at and modify SQL Server databases, but apparently it doesn't work with the new version of SQL Server (2005). I want to install the minimum amount of software on my dev machine, which is already running SQL Server 8.0.

posted by iconjack to computers & internet (10 comments total)

SQL Server Management Studio Express
posted by RustyBrooks at 10:16 AM on April 10, 2007

winsql will allow you to over ODBC. They have a free version that has the features you need.
posted by alkupe at 10:25 AM on April 10, 2007

I typically use Aqua Data Studio, though not with 2005 really (know it works but not much else - work hasn't moved to it yet). I keep using it because it works similarily to MS's tools (Query Analyzer and Enterprise Manager specifically). there's a free evaluation that doesn't expire.
posted by mrg at 10:34 AM on April 10, 2007

Seconding the SQL Server Management Studio.
posted by Doofus Magoo at 11:04 AM on April 10, 2007

Thanks for the answers. I installed SQL Server Management Studio Express, and was able to access the SQL Server 2005 database. Success! I may give the other suggestions a try, just to see what they're like.
posted by iconjack at 11:21 AM on April 10, 2007

The studio express is great, but note that you can't do data import with it, that's bitten me a few times trying to get excel data in.
posted by cschneid at 12:14 PM on April 10, 2007

You could use OpenOffice Base with ODBC, or am I missing something?
posted by meehawl at 4:57 PM on April 10, 2007

Last time I checked (which was a fairly long time) MS Access allowed you to connect and natively work as a client app with SQL server, as I recall, just in case you have and are familiar with its interface.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:24 PM on April 10, 2007

Access is not free.
posted by meehawl at 4:22 PM on April 11, 2007

Which is why I said "if you have...".

Fair enough, though: hoist by my semantical petard.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:13 PM on April 11, 2007