JOHNSON@NUHUB.ACS.NORTHEASTERN.EDU.UUCP (02/19/87)
>I will be acquiring SAS or SPSS for a VAX/VMS >system and would like to hear about any comments >people have on running SAS or SPSS. How big are >these packages, are they well structured for VMS, >etc. Please reply directly to me and I will >summarize if people want. > >Robert McQueen >Stevens Institute of Technology >BITNET: RMCQUEEN@SITVXA >------- At Northeastern University we have both. SPSSX takes up 10490/10592 blocks. SAS takes up 80356/81144 blocks. This is full blown on both. There are probably parts you can do without if you need the space. They both run on VMS. They both like to open lots of work files, sometime not where you expect them to be open. They also both love LOTS of virtual memory and working sets of 1000 to 1800 plus pages in order to work well. SAS has bugs and there are things that will run on IBM SAS that will NOT work on VMS SAS. SPSSX's installation procedure has bugs/bad features and is generally hell to run. SPSSX has bug too. Also, the installation procedure understand about VAXclusters and will define some logicals that won't work right on a cluster with out some fiddling. Further, if you have Datatrieve and link SPSSX with it, when Datatrieve changes SPSSX breaks. You need to relink SPSSX which means running that horrible installation procedure again. SPSSX Inc. is generally bad to deal with when there is a bug. It's hard to find someone to talk to who knows something. They often don't call back and need to be nagged at to get a response. SAS is better to deal with. They call back. The answer might be "Oh, that's a bug." but at least you get an answer and an acknowledgement of the problem. The above opinions as to software support are the result of having to deal with both companies. Chris Johnson Northeastern University csnet: johnson@nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu arpa: johnson%nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu@relay.cs.net at&t: (617) 437-2335
McGuire_Ed@GRINNELL.MAILNET.UUCP (03/02/87)
> SPSSX Inc. is generally bad to deal with when there is a bug. It's >hard to find someone to talk to who knows something. They often don't >call back and need to be nagged at to get a response. > > SAS is better to deal with. They call back. The answer might be >"Oh, that's a bug." but at least you get an answer and an >acknowledgement of the problem. > > The above opinions as to software support are the result of having >to deal with both companies. > >Chris Johnson >Northeastern University My experience with the two vendors is quite different. For SPSS questions, I generally talk to someone at the Northfield, MN, facility. Typically, the person who answers the phone has good technical expertise, and often can address the problem right over the phone. I haven't had problems with them not calling back. Sometimes I get an answering machine instead of a human being, but I get called right back. For SAS questions, I call the SAS institute. They often have trouble routing the call to the person who has the proper expertise. Not only that, but if everyone's on the phone at the moment, I am given the choice of waiting for someone to free up (which costs me phone dollars), or having them call me back _hours_ later. (Our sales rep is _much_ more responsive than the technical support group. :-) Ed McGuire Grinnell College MCGUIRE@GRIN2.BITNET