Is not that you did it. Not even why you did it. The saddest thing is that you think your customers and developers are idiots and you provide untruthful explanation.
Of course you crippled it deliberately, perfectly knowing WHAT and WHY you do. You crippled it because you want it to become paid once again. You explanation : we want the development to be focused on other areas, with higher ROI is no explanation for crippling older software and not just letting it be, as it is....
Paid component? Why not. Its your right to get paid for your (good) work. But not this way. I will not buy this product of your total customer disrespect in future.
2 Answers, 1 is accepted
Thank you for the honest feedback.
The absence of the designer hurt the usability of Data Access, indeed. We realize that the loss of the code generation left a huge gap in the development process of your applications and makes you question the future of Data Access. In this connection, our intention to improve the runtime of Data Access is very much truthful and very much official; you can find it in this blog post.
Here is the particular text as well:
Therefore, we decided to deprecate the visual tooling of Telerik Data Access (which includes the Visual Designer and all Visual Studio integration features), and continue investing solely in our powerful runtime features and code-only (fluent) mapping.Additionally, we are considering to ease the situation on the usability side through a simple tool that will be capable of generating fluent models based on an existing database. We will appreciate your support about the idea here.
Thank you for your understanding.
Regards,
Doroteya
Telerik
Rank 1
We have switched to EF until this functionality is returned in some way. Even EF7 which also removes the visual designer is still including a tool for generating code from a database.
I am pleased to see Telerik is working on a solution, but it is disappointing that such an important issue wasn't considered a high priority.