Focal Point Banner
Community Center Education Summit Technical Support User Groups
Let's Get Social!

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn YouTube
Focal Point    Focal Point Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  WebFOCUS/FOCUS Forum on Focal Point     [CLOSED] webfocus and SAS
Go
New
Search
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
[CLOSED] webfocus and SAS
 Login/Join
 
Member
posted
Hi All,

Our company is trying to justify our use of WebFOCUS and push us towards SAS. I personally feel that WF is the more robust and powerful tool, epecially combined with ReportCaster. However, not knowing SAS, I cannot be sure. Has anyone used both extensively? What are the strengths of both? Can I get people's thoughts?

thanks,
Alan

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kerry,
 
Posts: 16 | Registered: November 17, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Virtuoso
posted Hide Post
I haven't used SAS in some time. Seems to me it's biggest strength is number/statistics manipulation.


Leah
 
Posts: 1317 | Location: Council Bluffs, IA | Registered: May 24, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Member
posted Hide Post
Alan, let me start by first accepting that I am sure biased towards WF too. But like Leah was saying, it would totally depend on the target user base. While we have had WF for over 5 years, SAS-EnterpriseGuide was brought in exclusively for the Actuarial/Statistics department to let them do their own thing (with minimal support from IT).
Unless you already have users with SAS exp., it will be a decently long learning curve. For starters, SAS-EG has a big footprint on each User's desktop and is limited to PCs it has been installed on (unlike the WF thin-client). While there are some numerical functions that SAS can do better, the SAS-DB2 connect to the mainframe as we have here, cannot translate many SAS commands to SQL. In some of these cases, SAS tried to bring down the entire 100-million row DB2 tables down to the SAS server and process the data there. We have less than 10 SAS users and they have caused some heavy network traffic while using SAS. Many of the functions in SAS are not too straight-forward and visible either.
Of course, these kinda things will become sporadic with time. BTW, do you have the option of keeping both WF & SAS ? WF has the advantage of having the EDASERV on the mainframe, right where the data is, and most of the processing can be done right there before passing back the result set thru the network to the server/end-user.
Those are some of the first things that I can tell you about SAS vs WF.
Hope its clear as mud !!!

Best regards,
Sandeep Mamidenna


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Cross & Blue Shield of MS
WF.76-10 on (WS2003 + WebSphere) / EDA on z/OS + DB2 + MS-SQL
MRE, BID, Dev. Studio, Self-Service apps & a dash of fun !! Music
 
Posts: 218 | Location: Jackson, MS | Registered: October 31, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Member
posted Hide Post
And may I add that it was quite an undertaking for us to get all the installation/configurations right at our place. And then our Data team had to work for weeks/months to build new tables/databases for these SAS users so as to not impact the overall DB2 performance.

Sandeep Mamidenna


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Cross & Blue Shield of MS
WF.76-10 on (WS2003 + WebSphere) / EDA on z/OS + DB2 + MS-SQL
MRE, BID, Dev. Studio, Self-Service apps & a dash of fun !! Music
 
Posts: 218 | Location: Jackson, MS | Registered: October 31, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Expert
posted Hide Post
they're totally different animals, as are the developers for each. WF joins up with SPSS (another stat package , that's been around for decades, as well.) beautifully. That's the perfect solution for you... statistical functionality with killer extract, dw, and reporting. SAS developers are just as fanatic about SAS as WF developers are about WF, and justifiably so, but for totally different purposes. If your company is just wanting more stat power, then go look at SPSS and the nice wf connectability.




In Focus since 1979///7706m/5 ;wintel 2008/64;OAM security; Oracle db, ///MRE/BID
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: Manhattan | Registered: October 28, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Thanks, Leah, Sandeep, & susannah.

Actually, w/o getting into a long story, it's a case of standard tools for the company ... that is ... SAS is considered a standard tool while WF is not. We are trying to make a case to keep WF. That is -- if we are forced to go to SAS -- we are going to lose functionality and not be able to do what we have historically been able to do with WF. Not to mention a steep learning curve for SAS.

What I hear you all saying is that they are not equal in functionality (which I presumed), in the sense that SAS is more for statistical purposes (?). Needless to say, that really worries me. Historically, we have used WF for connecting to various platforms (Teradata, DB2, Oracle, flatfiles, Access), extensive data manipulation, putting together huge datasets with queries involving many multiple steps, for lots of report generation (with some front-end web apps), job scheduling, running DOS/Windows scripts, and the like.

Thoughts?

Alan
 
Posts: 16 | Registered: November 17, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Member
posted Hide Post
Thanks for bring up SPSS Susannah. It was on my mind when I started my note, but forgot mentioning it as I closed it.

And yes Alan, SAS has the advantage by itself if you are talking about core-statistical functions like Mean,SD,etc. But the SPSS add-on would give you that with WF. But ofcourse WF has the upper hand when you are talking about all kinds of data access from various platforms, manipulation, formatting and presentation (Caster included). To port all you got to SAS would be close to impossible.

Sandeep Mamidenna.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Cross & Blue Shield of MS
WF.76-10 on (WS2003 + WebSphere) / EDA on z/OS + DB2 + MS-SQL
MRE, BID, Dev. Studio, Self-Service apps & a dash of fun !! Music
 
Posts: 218 | Location: Jackson, MS | Registered: October 31, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Expert
posted Hide Post
and just a note that SPSS has been around since punch cards. ( i know 'cause i keypunched my own dissertation data, for any of you who know what a punch card is).. so, talk about 'standard'.




In Focus since 1979///7706m/5 ;wintel 2008/64;OAM security; Oracle db, ///MRE/BID
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: Manhattan | Registered: October 28, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by BlueZone:
Alan, let me start by first accepting that I am sure biased towards WF too. But like Leah was saying, it would totally depend on the target user base. While we have had WF for over 5 years, SAS-EnterpriseGuide was brought in exclusively for the Actuarial/Statistics department to let them do their own thing (with minimal support from IT).
Unless you already have users with SAS exp., it will be a decently long learning curve. For starters, SAS-EG has a big footprint on each User's desktop and is limited to PCs it has been installed on (unlike the WF thin-client). While there are some numerical functions that SAS can do better, the SAS-DB2 connect to the mainframe as we have here, cannot translate many SAS commands to SQL. In some of these cases, SAS tried to bring down the entire 100-million row DB2 tables down to the SAS server and process the data there. We have less than 10 SAS users and they have caused some heavy network traffic while using SAS. Many of the functions in SAS are not too straight-forward and visible either.
Of course, these kinda things will become sporadic with time. BTW, do you have the option of keeping both WF & SAS ? WF has the advantage of having the EDASERV on the mainframe, right where the data is, and most of the processing can be done right there before passing back the result set thru the network to the server/end-user.
Those are some of the first things that I can tell you about SAS vs WF.
Hope its clear as mud !!!

Best regards,
Sandeep Mamidenna


Hi Sandeep,

We are doing Webfocus code conversion to sas code.In that time we need to produce reports based on webfocus reports.Could you send me any code examples of this connversion.


WebFOCUS 7.6
Windows, All Outputs
 
Posts: 3 | Registered: October 04, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by alandool:
Hi All,

Our company is trying to justify our use of WebFOCUS and push us towards SAS. I personally feel that WF is the more robust and powerful tool, epecially combined with ReportCaster. However, not knowing SAS, I cannot be sure. Has anyone used both extensively? What are the strengths of both? Can I get people's thoughts?

thanks,
Alan


WebFOCUS 7.6
Windows, All Outputs
 
Posts: 3 | Registered: October 04, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Hi,

I am vary new to webfocus.According to my project requires webfocus code convert into sas code.Webfocus reports should be also convert into sas reports.Do you aware of this could you send me some sample codes.

Regards
Praveen


WebFOCUS 7.6
Windows, All Outputs
 
Posts: 3 | Registered: October 04, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Member
posted Hide Post
Gooluck. I cannot see you getting much assistance from this forum.

SAS and WebFOCUS are vastly different in the way they work.
 
Posts: 142 | Location: Adelaide South Australia | Registered: October 27, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Expert
posted Hide Post
There's absolutely no way anyone on this forum would assist in converting WebFOCUS code to SAS code. People are stealing our bread and butter and now they want the meat as well!


Francis


Give me code, or give me retirement. In FOCUS since 1991

Production: WF 7.7.05M, Dev Studio, BID, MRE, WebSphere, DB2 / Test: WF 8.1.05M, App Studio, BI Portal, Report Caster, jQuery, HighCharts, Apache Tomcat, MS SQL Server
 
Posts: 10577 | Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada | Registered: April 27, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Expert
posted Hide Post
I recently left a company that had both WebFOCUS and SAS. There were many SAS bigots who lived and died with it. But there were just as many who loved WebFOCUS. One of the knocks that I heard about SAS was the inability to do drill downs. Also, many people created SAS DBs and used WebFOCUS to report against them. We used an ODBC connection and it worked quite well.


Ginny
---------------------------------
Prod: WF 7.7.01 Dev: WF 7.6.9-11
Admin, MRE,self-service; adapters: Teradata, DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, Essbase, ESRI, FlexEnable, Google
 
Posts: 2723 | Location: Ann Arbor, MI | Registered: April 05, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Expert
posted Hide Post
quote:
many people created SAS DBs and used WebFOCUS to report against them. We used an ODBC connection and it worked quite well.

That's quite interesting!!! I was not aware there is a SAS ODBC driver. I suppose this is an add-on to SAS and costs extra...


Francis


Give me code, or give me retirement. In FOCUS since 1991

Production: WF 7.7.05M, Dev Studio, BID, MRE, WebSphere, DB2 / Test: WF 8.1.05M, App Studio, BI Portal, Report Caster, jQuery, HighCharts, Apache Tomcat, MS SQL Server
 
Posts: 10577 | Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada | Registered: April 27, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Expert
posted Hide Post
I don't know if the cost is extra for the SAS ODBC driver. If you need more information, private post me and I'll give you a contact name,


Ginny
---------------------------------
Prod: WF 7.7.01 Dev: WF 7.6.9-11
Admin, MRE,self-service; adapters: Teradata, DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, Essbase, ESRI, FlexEnable, Google
 
Posts: 2723 | Location: Ann Arbor, MI | Registered: April 05, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Member
posted Hide Post
Bonjour,
As a private Joke, I'd say that Focus Analyse can stand the Statistical Analysis by SAS ...
I was happy enough as to work in a company using both SAS and Focus (long time ago, as usual with me).
We prepared Data in the Focus World where all could be reached. We extracted (Random) about 10% and built with Focus the Sas Code for getting this extract into the Sas World.
My Marketing friend made a tough Job of Data Analysis with Sas (calculating efficient Indicators).
Still with Sas he built the Define Code that would make Focus able to calculate those "Sas indicators of segmentation".
Our idea was big Job with Focus, Intellectual Statistical Analysis with Sas (on a fragment of our Data) => Building of Indicators that Focus could apply to the whole Data.
I really enjoyed the complentarity of both tools.
And I'll turn to another private Joke : Focus and Sas fought so much as being the best and the other an old-fashioned tool that Business Object could grow his own way ...
But this place is Focus oriented, and I don't pretend to be objective. This Focus is mine (M. Jackson).
Focusely and Cordially


Focus Mainframe 7.6.11
Dev Studio 7.6.11 and !!!
PC Focus, Focus for OS/2, FFW Six, MSO
 
Posts: 134 | Registered: November 06, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Hi Everyone,
I support all the IBI and SAS tools and agree with Ginny on all the points above.

And YES - SAS ODBC access is an extra billable option in all environments.

Enjoy!
Michelle


WebFOCUS Production: UNIX 7.7.03M
WebFOCUS Test: UNIX EDASERVE 7.7.05 Client 8.0.01
 
Posts: 28 | Location: Connecticut USA | Registered: August 29, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Focal Point    Focal Point Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  WebFOCUS/FOCUS Forum on Focal Point     [CLOSED] webfocus and SAS

Copyright © 1996-2018 Information Builders, leaders in enterprise business intelligence.