Ben Bolker schrieb:
Philippe Grosjean phgrosjean at sciviews.org writes:
Hello,
For a paper published in 2007, and submitted in April 2005, this is
still surprising. If I my calculation is correct, in 2004, they would
have used R 2.2.x, or something,... not 1.9.1?
Anyway, does
Hello,
I just read this paper, and was surprised by:
This study performs a comparison of the latest versions of nine
different statistical software packages using StRD. These packages are
SAS (9.1), SPSS (12.0), Excel (2003), Minitab (14.0), Stata (8.1), Splus
(6.2), R (1.9.1), JMP (5.0), and
Philippe Grosjean phgrosjean at sciviews.org writes:
Hello,
For a paper published in 2007, and submitted in April 2005, this is
still surprising. If I my calculation is correct, in 2004, they would
have used R 2.2.x, or something,... not 1.9.1?
Anyway, does someone know if there is a
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Philippe Grosjean wrote:
Hello,
I just read this paper, and was surprised by:
This study performs a comparison of the latest versions of nine
different statistical software packages using StRD. These packages are
SAS (9.1), SPSS (12.0), Excel (2003), Minitab (14.0),
Thomas Lumley tlumley at u.washington.edu writes:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Philippe Grosjean wrote:
Hello,
[snip]
No -- there is a new x.y.0 twice per year. Checking the r-announce
archives shows that 2.0.0 came out in October 2004 and 1.9.1 in June 2004.
Describing 1.9.1 as the
Dear R Users,
May be you are interested in an article that compares 9 statistical
softwares (including R).
Any comments are appreciate.
Article:
Keeling, Kellie B.; Pavur, Robert J.A comparative study of the reliability
of nine statistical software packages Computational Statistics and Data
