Ive not tried this, but does anyone know what constitutes a "proper" directory structure for a solution?

I understand your situation. Some companies are like this. And I recognize the intent of trying to help others learn. But there are times when it is best to be blunt. Believe me, I make alot of mistakes myself and at times, take short cuts that would not be acceptable to others. Perhaps I was too harsh in my original comment. Do realize, though, that when you post on topics openly, you will be reviewed and critiqued. Just as you performed a service to others by educating them on this, my response is meant to educate them that this is critical stuff to learn. (and that loops in SQL are generally discouraged) Some of us are just more grumpy about these things as we tend to spend alot of time trying to improve the performance of poorly designed applications.

Make no mistake though; I absolutely do encourage you and your readers to continue posting articles. Basic topics are always welcome just the same.

Ugh... this comment on the link:

"why is it so complicated to write a loop without turning the database upside down? "

Sorry...fired. I can't even read the rest of the article for the pain that statement just caused me.

I don't mean to sound rude, but this is pretty basic stuff. If you're a .NET programmer and don't know what SCOPE_IDENTITY() is, I'd be worried about you... Every ".NET developer" should know some basics about SQL development.

The job is overrated. I know - I AM one. The down side to it is that you do much less coding - which eats away at being able to flex your skills. Instead, you spend more time reading, and writing documents, spending time in meetings, etc. If you want to manage, this is the starting line. But if you really love to write code, avoid this at all costs. And dont let the promise of more money force you into it. Being unhappy in your job is not worth the extra cash.

Where I work, we implemented exactly this kind of solution using a Windows service for scheduling. It did / does work, but in hindsight, I would have to agree with the author. Its a bit too "low-level" for all it does. Granted, I dont like task scheduler, but it IS made for these kinds of scenarios. And the other thing to think about is maintenance. Putting stuff like this in as a Windows service takes it out of the proper context for troubleshooting. Folks who do the support of a system may (rightfully so) think that the buggy scheduled process is running via task scheduler, when its actually tucked away on a machine as a service. It just makes sense to put it where Microsoft recommends.

Ow this is bad... please no more... :(

I still dont get the value of doing this... anyone have any input? How is this "the next big thing"?

Yeah, Ive been playing with Silverlight (BARELY)... it really looks like a good thing. I guess what Im confused about, though, is how to access the visual objects within the code. For instance, if you have XAML for the textbox, how do you access it in the code behind? Or can you? Another slightly annoying thing is that you cant actually *use* the designer in 2008 - its just for show. You actually have to type all the XAML in or use Expression to do the design. Its a minor annoyance, but us Visual Studio developers have been so used to using the IDE for everything that this seems like going backwards a bit. The overall roadmap for technologies is interesting... we're going SOA, we're going MVC, Silverlight and WPF... my goodness it doesnt take long for a technology to gather dust... what to learn... ugh..