choosing a collation in SQL 2005

I have been searching for advice on the 'right' collation to choose in SQL 2005. I am US based and can assume any language required not supported by Latin1_General will be in unicode. I have SQL 2000 servers using SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS and SQL_Latin1_General_CP850_CI_AS. The ones using CP850 will be converted to whatever collation is chosen in SQL 2005. I do not know the implications of choosing the default SQL collation as opposed to choosing Latin1_General_CI_AS. I have seen warning messages when installing analysis services if the SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS is chosen saying that analysis services will use the colaltion Latin1_General_... . I also use non-updating subscribers in transactional replication currently in teh SQL 2000 environment and will continue to use replication in SQL 2005.

What are the implications of choosing the windows vs. SQL collation if the choice is between SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS and Latin1_Gernal_CI_AS ? I do not want a collation mixture like I currently have in SQL 2000.

There's a helpful topic in Books Online that addresses this:

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms144260.aspx

Buck Woody

|||Thank you very much. This is the information I needed to see. I am not sure why searching BOL myself did not turn up this information.|||

If I am doing a fresh installation of SQL 2005 for a new application which will utilize databse engine, report server and analysis services is my best choice Latin_General_BIN2?

Thank you,
Alex Ivanoff

|||My understanding is binary collations do not sort in order you may expect. I'm not sure it's the best unless you know you need it. But, I'm not expert and am interested in an experts opinion.