I don't mean to come across as a stat software expert, but I do have a fair
amount of experience with a number of packages, especially SAS,
StatGraphics, JMP, and MINITAB. I find MINITAB very easy to use. My
engineers have also found it to be easier to come back to after a period of
non-use than JMP (I think StatGraphics was pretty good on this too, but not
quite up to MINITAB.
By the way, I've been told:
MINITAB = the software
Minitab = the company
Just to clarify, my use tends to be for pretty much classic industrial
statistics: histograms, bar charts, some custom plots, tabulation, frequency
tables, summary stats, comparative tests (t, ANOVA, multiple comparisons),
GR&R, process characterization, regression (simple & multiple), variance
components, mixed effects models, DOE, reliability analysis, and recently
I'm trying to learn more about categorical methods (probit, logistic
models).
Ken. K.
"Ken K." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
94i9b3$2j2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:94i9b3$2j2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> A LOT depends on what kind of analyses you wish to do with the software,
the
> capability level of the user w.r.t. statistics, AND the frequency with
which
> you'll use the software (related to "relearning" how to use the software
> after an extended absence).
>
> I've used a bunch of software in my day. I used a LOT of SAS when I worked
> for General Motors. Where I work now, I used SAS for a few years mores, we
> used StatGraphics (both DOS & Windows) for four or five years; we used JMP
> for three years, and now have been using MINITAB for three years I have no
> experience with S-plus or SPSS, but did do a lot of benchmarking 3-4 years
> ago when we were looking for an alternative to JMP (when they stopped
> offering concurrent licensing). At that point I spent a lot of time
looking
> at Statistica, but didn't spend much time with SPSS since it had a weak
DOE
> tool. At the time SysStat's DOE tool was also pretty archaic, so I didn't
> spend much time on that.
>
> Here are my slightly biased thoughts:
>
> SAS - VERY POWERFUL, but hard to learn except for the basics. If you don't
> need to tweak too many of the options the Procs can kick out lots of stuff
> pretty easily. Working with data sets and graphs, I felt, was a major
pain.
> I spent a lot of time on Excel to avoid SAS. Its also very expensive:
> $1000+/year.
>
> S+ - I hear it is becoming very popular with the stat development bunch.
It
> is easier to do new neat stuff with S+ than with SAS. It appears to be
more
> complicated than some others, but as I said I don't have much exposure to
> S+.
>
> SPSS - not a lot of experience here. It appears to be focused more on
> regression analysis or something than the industrial stats world in which
I
> live.
>
> MINITAB - easy to use, clean menus, relatively cheap, surprisingly
powerful.
> Nice downloadable fully functional demo. Best for the occasional user. My
> favorite. Oh, and it has the absolute best help system I've ever seen in
any
> software. They did real good with that. Oh, and all manuals are provided
in
> a nicely done Acrobat format. It has some quirks when trying to edit
> graphs - you have to remember that they are created via macros, so if you
> want to modify something on the graph you basically have to create a whole
> new graph using additional options rather than just modify the existing
> graph. That will all be changed with version 14 coming out in a year or
so.
> Did I mention it's reliability and accelerated testing tool is just about
> the best I've seen?
>
> JMP - powerful, claims to be easy to use, but I always found it quirky.
For
> example, ALL of the modeling is done via its "Fit Model" tool. To do
> anything you'd better know this well I think MINITAB is a better choice.
JMP
> 3's help and documentation was pretty mediocre. Also it is really a
> Macintosh program sitting in Windows. It has kept the Mac quirkiness.
>
> StatGraphics - also very powerful with some nice tools, BUT was cursed
with
> a rather odd looking (just visually) windows environment. They now have a
> new version out - I'd be curious to see if they improved it. If they did
it
> would be a real contender with MINITAB.
>
> Statistica - I found this to be very powerful, but I had to spend a lot of
> time learning it. It really wasn't very intuitive in many areas. It has a
> very nice graphics engine. It was also pretty expensive. How can they say
> they've won every comparison?
>
> As mentioned by someone else, MatLab and Mathematica do have some
statistics
> content, but they are no more stat packages than is Excel. Which brings up
> the semi-famous Excel math errors - be very careful with Excel.
>
> My advice, get the demos and spend lots of time playing with them.
MINITAB's
> demo is fully functional - it just times out after 30 days (you can call
> them to extend it to 60 days). JMP's demo is pretty crippled - you have to
> use their data without any hint which methods use which data sets - it
> drives me nuts (most of my company uses JMP, but I can't stand it anymore
> now that I have MINITAB). Statistica used to give you demo with just a few
> capabilities - it was pretty hard to get the feel with. I think I read
that
> StatGraphics now has a fully functional demo like MINITAB.
>
> If you find yourself scratching your head over the demo, then maybe its
too
> hard to use - it shouldn't have to be. After I'd spent weeks playing with
> Statistica I finally loaded the MINITAB demo - the software's menus were
so
> clean and logical it was literally like a breath of fresh air. I'm not
> kidding.
>
> I'd look at them in this order: MINITAB, StatGraphics, JMP, Statistica,
and
> then the others. I think SPSS would be next and then S-plus, but don't
> really know about those. I've heard some say MINITAB is just for
teaching -
> don't be fooled - it is just as powerful as the others, maybe more so.
>
> "Bob Hayden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > ----- Forwarded message from Jan -----
> >
> > Could you please give advantages the major stat. systems
> > over others and strength and weakness of them.
> > Eg. could you compare SAS, S (S+), SPSS, Minitab, Statgraphics (plus),
> > Matlab, Maple, Mathematica?
> >
> > ----- End of forwarded message from Jan -----
> >
> > Matlab, Maple, are Mathematica mathematics programs with some
> > stats. cabability. They are not very easy to learn. I would not use
> > them with beginners who are not mathematics majors.
> >
> > Minitab is easy to use and there is a huge amount of documentation.
> > Many statistics textbooks in the US include info on Minitab.
> >
> > I think SAS and S are not neraly as easy to use.
> >
> > _
> > | | Robert W. Hayden
> > | | Work: Department of Mathematics
> > / | Plymouth State College MSC#29
> > | | Plymouth, New Hampshire 03264 USA
> > | * | fax (603) 535-2943
> > / | Home: 82 River Street (use this in the summer)
> > | ) Ashland, NH 03217
> > L_____/ (603) 968-9914 (use this year-round)
> > Map of New [EMAIL PROTECTED] (works year-round)
> > Hampshire http://mathpc04.plymouth.edu (works year-round)
> >
> > The State of New Hampshire takes no responsibility for what this map
> > looks like if you are not using a fixed-width font such as Courier.
> >
> > "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in
> > overalls and looks like work." --Thomas Edison
> >
> >
> >
> > =================================================================
> > Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
> > the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
> > http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
> > =================================================================
>
>
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
