Re: Excel vs. Specialized stats packages (was: Excel vs Quattro Pro)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --2FCDC48C37CC68962902D12E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Excel is a microsoft product. Microsoft's approach is to take existing concepts and re-package them. (e.g., MSDOS followed most of the conventions of RT-11 and RSX-11, Windows used a lot of the conventions of Mosaic and DecWindows) It did not introduce most of the concepts in Excel. NPCalc was using a visual spreadsheet before Microsoft or PC's existed. VisiCalc introduced the visual spreadsheet to PC's. James Huntington wrote: > > It doesn't, but my point was that a stats package is based around a > spreadsheet (most of which plagiarize Excel), > --2FCDC48C37CC68962902D12E Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="Arthur.Kendall.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Art Kendall Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Arthur.Kendall.vcf" begin:vcard n:Kendall;Art tel;work:301-864-5570 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] fn:Art Kendall end:vcard --2FCDC48C37CC68962902D12E-- = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: Excel vs. Specialized stats packages (was: Excel vs Quattro Pro)
"Dennis Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >This is an interesting discussion, but the line between a spreadsheet and > >stats package is not so clear-cut these days. If you look at how the major > >stats packages have developed over the last decade, you can see how they > >have copied more and more features from Excel. In fact almost all stats > >packages now boast of containing a fully featured built-in spreadsheet for > >data entry. > > certainly minitab makes no such claim ... their worksheet is NOT a spreadsheet The Minitab worksheet is for all intents & purposes a spreadsheet, albeit a "structured" spreadsheet to accept a dataset and variables in columnar format. > >Looking at the situation from another angle, why can't a spreadsheet be used > >for statistical analysis? Granted, some of Excel's built-in statistical > >functions leave a lot to be desired and should be used with care. But the > >Excel spreadsheet package is still head-and-shoulders above any other > >similar product in terms of ease of use, data entry and collection, > >presentation, programming interfaces, and it's excellent integration with > >the other Office applications. > > so, i am not sure this has anything to do with statistical analysis It doesn't, but my point was that a stats package is based around a spreadsheet (most of which plagiarize Excel), so why can't a good spreadsheet package (like Excel) be the basis of a stats package? There is no reason why it can't! > >A reliable low-cost statistics add-on for Excel can easily bypass these > >problems. > > unfortunately though, it does not exist > > here are the major problems with using excel as a stat package including > 3rd party plugins (off the top of my head) > > 1. poor data MANAGEMENT capabilities > 2. poor and HIGHLY LIMITED graphics > 3. highly limited set of routines to select from > 4. inability to work with any/many random generation functions (for > distributions) > 5. limited access to important statistical tables The needs of an individual user vary and I think that is never considered in these discussions. Most of the above does not apply to the vast majority of "less statistically minded" people wanting a statistics package that covers all the basic "undergraduate level" stats functions that they need in education or business. As with everything, you get what you pay for, and the low US$100 price of an Excel add-on stats package compares very well against a starting price of over US$500 for a "proper" stats package which includes nothing extra that such a user might need. And this is just for a comparable package, not for the advanced statistical modules which can cost thousands of $. Points 1, 4 and 5 and not a concern for most users. Excel includes more than enough data management tools, including PivotTables, although it does lack the Stack/Split functions of stats packages. Points 4 & 5 are not applicable to most users, only to advanced statistical researchers or for educational purposes. Point 3 depends on what kind of statistical analysis you require and is the same with any software. Excel add-ons do not cater for everything, but the wealth of add-ons for statistics, forecasting, and SPC cover all the areas where statistics are needed in business. Finally, point 2 is debatable considering the lack of decent graphics and still ASCII output of many of the older-generation stats packages. Granted, the formatting of Excel's charts by default is not very helpful, and this is an area that needs some attention. But until a few years ago, Minitab only included a graphical histogram & bell-curve after a user developed a macro to do it, which Minitab then incorporated into the shipped version! > from discussions like this on several lists, it is clear that no argument > pro or con will sway those who have opted for or agin using excel as the > statistical analysis tool > > but, each side keeps trying The reason I responded was to bring some "balance" to the discussion, which I think is always lacking in these discussions of Excel vs. Stats packages. I believe those against Excel, the statisticians, will never be swayed and nor should they because Excel does not offer the kind of advanced statistical research that some need. But equally, those now using Excel should be aware of the options available for statistics within Excel and the advantages that brings. _ James Huntington, ..Analyse-it Software, Ltd. . Analyse-it! accurate low-cost statistical software for Microsoft Excel. For more information & to download a free evaluation, visit us: http://www.analyse-it.com = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat
Re: Excel vs. Specialized stats packages (was: Excel vs Quattro Pro)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --FF40099A76AC09807844CBC3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James Huntington wrote: > Excel spreadsheet package is still head-and-shoulders above any other > similar product in terms of ease of use, data entry and collection, > presentation, programming interfaces, and it's excellent integration with > the other Office applications. > IMHO. Excel has market share but it is third in the three major spreadsheets for ease of use etc.. Quattro Pro, Lotus, Excel. Spreadsheets are not designed to carry value labels, distinct missing values, level of measurement, etc in the data definition --FF40099A76AC09807844CBC3 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="Arthur.Kendall.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Art Kendall Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Arthur.Kendall.vcf" begin:vcard n:Kendall;Art tel;work:301-864-5570 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] fn:Art Kendall end:vcard --FF40099A76AC09807844CBC3-- = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: Excel vs. Specialized stats packages (was: Excel vs Quattro Pro)
>rse? > >This is an interesting discussion, but the line between a spreadsheet and >stats package is not so clear-cut these days. If you look at how the major >stats packages have developed over the last decade, you can see how they >have copied more and more features from Excel. In fact almost all stats >packages now boast of containing a fully featured built-in spreadsheet for >data entry. certainly minitab makes no such claim ... their worksheet is NOT a spreadsheet >Looking at the situation from another angle, why can't a spreadsheet be used >for statistical analysis? Granted, some of Excel's built-in statistical >functions leave a lot to be desired and should be used with care. But the >Excel spreadsheet package is still head-and-shoulders above any other >similar product in terms of ease of use, data entry and collection, >presentation, programming interfaces, and it's excellent integration with >the other Office applications. so, i am not sure this has anything to do with statistical analysis >So if the basic spreadsheet component is sound, and almost all computer and >non-computer literate users can use Excel without problems, why not just >extend Excel's statistical capabilities with reliable accurate statistical >add-ons? Many exist, and we develop a product called "Analyse-it" for this >very purpose. i have looked at analyse-it and one other plug in (plus what comes with excel) ... and, there just is no comparision between them (well there is ... and it is not very good) and most of the popular stat packages >A reliable low-cost statistics add-on for Excel can easily bypass these >problems. unfortunately though, it does not exist here are the major problems with using excel as a stat package including 3rd party plugins (off the top of my head) 1. poor data MANAGEMENT capabilities 2. poor and HIGHLY LIMITED graphics 3. highly limited set of routines to select from 4. inability to work with any/many random generation functions (for distributions) 5. limited access to important statistical tables from discussions like this on several lists, it is clear that no argument pro or con will sway those who have opted for or agin using excel as the statistical analysis tool but, each side keeps trying this kind of discussion, though interesting, pales in comparision to a discussion we should be having about the over reliance and importance we place in statistical analysis in the first place ... and even though i have been in this sort of enterprise for more years than you can shake a stick at ... the reality is that typical analysis that we do has limited practical uses and benefits the entire area of statistical significance testing is just one case in point >_ > >James Huntington, >..Analyse-it Software, Ltd. >. >Analyse-it! accurate low-cost statistical software for >Microsoft Excel. For more information & to download a >free evaluation, visit us: http://www.analyse-it.com > > > > >= >Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the >problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at > http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ >= _ dennis roberts, educational psychology, penn state university 208 cedar, AC 8148632401, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://roberts.ed.psu.edu/users/droberts/drober~1.htm = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Excel vs. Specialized stats packages (was: Excel vs Quattro Pro)
"Dennis Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > i don't know the answer to this but ... i have a general question with > regards to using spreadsheets for stat analysis > > why? ... why do we not help our students and encourage our students to use > tools designed for a task ... rather than substituting something that may > just barely get us by? > > we don't ask stat packages to do what spreadsheets were designed to do ... > why the reverse? This is an interesting discussion, but the line between a spreadsheet and stats package is not so clear-cut these days. If you look at how the major stats packages have developed over the last decade, you can see how they have copied more and more features from Excel. In fact almost all stats packages now boast of containing a fully featured built-in spreadsheet for data entry. Looking at the situation from another angle, why can't a spreadsheet be used for statistical analysis? Granted, some of Excel's built-in statistical functions leave a lot to be desired and should be used with care. But the Excel spreadsheet package is still head-and-shoulders above any other similar product in terms of ease of use, data entry and collection, presentation, programming interfaces, and it's excellent integration with the other Office applications. So if the basic spreadsheet component is sound, and almost all computer and non-computer literate users can use Excel without problems, why not just extend Excel's statistical capabilities with reliable accurate statistical add-ons? Many exist, and we develop a product called "Analyse-it" for this very purpose. I think the group should also remember than versions of SAS and SPSS from only a few years ago suffered from accuracy problems. McCullough published details of the problems in his articles for "The American Statistician" in 1999. Of course, the product developers have now fixed the problems which customers no doubt paid for in later upgrades. And yet these packages are still seen as the gold standard, taken for granted as accurate, even though these accuracy problems lurked for possibly 10 or 15 years until highlighted by McCullough! I am not saying the problems of Excel, a tool so widely used and taken for granted by most users, should not have its problems highlighted. But, to say that the whole Excel package should be dismissed in favour of a stats package which costs more, basically is a copy of Excel's spreadsheet functionality, and then has accuracy problems of it's own, is a little blinkered. A reliable low-cost statistics add-on for Excel can easily bypass these problems. _ James Huntington, ..Analyse-it Software, Ltd. . Analyse-it! accurate low-cost statistical software for Microsoft Excel. For more information & to download a free evaluation, visit us: http://www.analyse-it.com = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
