Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 16:19:03 +0000
Reply-To: toby dunn <tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: toby dunn <tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
In-Reply-To: <B1F53654A57E42A58D6713BB4C76714C@D1871RB1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Nat,
Well my friend in my world the "Sqeeky wheel gets oiled and if it still sqeeks it will be replaced". I would tend to agree with you except for the fact that SAS is trying to force this as the new editor they wnt us to use. Now we went from the users wanting to take an existing tool and moding to make it easier for them, to SAS forcing the issue the other direction. So are we to bow down to the mighty SAS and be their whipping boys or should they actually do what I always heard they did and talk to us users and find out what the hell we want. Seems to me over the few years I have been using SAS and going to user group conferences that what I always hear about SAS being uber responsive to its users is slowly going the way of the do-do bird. And please no one bring up microsoft and apple, I mean come on the freakin the number and breadth of users are completely different. Basic business and econ 101 here but you are comparing apple to oranges.
Toby Dunn
"Don't bail. The best gold is at the bottom of barrels of crap."
Randy Pausch
"Be prepared. Luck is where preparation meets opportunity."
Randy Pausch
> From: nathani@verizon.net
> To: tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM; SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:13:12 -0400
>
> Toby
>
> I have seen someone at SAS pose a question on who uses what but still, we
> know our issues and problems and needs so I think that we should let SI know
> what we need. They do have the ballot and that has long served as a means of
> posing suggestions and there are opportunites whenever we see some one from
> there. But still, there is nothing wrong with being a squeeky wheel (for
> non-native speakers, there is an English proverb that goes "the squeeky
> wheel gets the grease"). When you see a need, speak up.
>
> My .002
>
> Nat
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "toby dunn" <tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM>
> To: <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 9:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
>
>
> Alan,
>
>
>
> > What is needed is a concerted effort to say "we would like this in a
> > developer tool".
>
>
>
> I diasagree here what we need is SAS to make a concerted effort to reach out
> to us the programmers to help them make it better. Something I have yet to
> really see them do, the closest has been through the sas ware ballots and
> may be Dorfmans and hash code. YOu keep saying we need to approach them,
> no, that is bad business on their part they need to be approaching us and
> asking us what we want in it and how can we make this better. WE are the
> one's using it, we are the ones who eventually deciede their fate by using
> their product over another. There are many things I and many others would
> love to help SAS out on but they neglect to ask us. If they would work
> closer with us we could make them better than what they are right now.
>
>
>
> If they really want EG to take off they can do it the hard wat and force it
> or they can call some of us and have us help them produce a product that is
> worth something. My question is why do we have to take the intiative when
> it should be SAS asking for our advice.
>
>
>
>
>
> Toby Dunn
>
> "Don't bail. The best gold is at the bottom of barrels of crap."
> Randy Pausch
>
> "Be prepared. Luck is where preparation meets opportunity."
> Randy Pausch
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 00:26:19 -0600
> > From: alan.churchill@SAVIAN.NET
> > Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> >
> > Fair question Jack. I think a lot of work has gone into making the coding
> > and project management easier. Now we get down to the brass tacks.
> >
> > I went to a meeting where we got a 30k foot view of SAS R&D directions.
> > That's fine but we also need to know, what the -10 foot view is because we
> > live in the trenches. By bringing some of these issues to the forefront,
> > SAS
> > R&D can help set their own internal development direction.
> >
> > What is needed is a concerted effort to say "we would like this in a
> > developer tool". For people to say DM has to be updated or EG is worthless
> > is the wrong approach IMO. I like the posters but I disagree with the
> > posts.
> >
> >
> > For me, switching from Visual Studios to DM is a throwback in time. I
> > never
> > would have realized that until I used VS but I do now. EG 4.3 represents a
> > watershed moment and a move toward a VS/Eclipse experience but it is the
> > beginning of the conversation. Let SAS R&D know what is needed and let
> > them
> > prioritize it. They are developers too so they understand what we deal
> > with
> > which is why they made the changes in EG 4.3.
> >
> > BTW, when Ron Fehd can use UltraEdit more effectively than DM, that says a
> > lot. UE in that mode exactly mimics EG since it is batch submit.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > Alan Churchill
> > Savian
> > Work: 719-687-5954
> > Cell: 719-310-4870
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jack Hamilton [mailto:jfh@alumni.stanford.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 11:33 PM
> > To: Alan Churchill
> > Cc: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [SAS-L] Notes from SAS Global Forum
> >
> > I wonder: how does SAS Institute expect us to debug programs under EG? Log
> > on to the server and run in line mode?
> >
> > If they are using EG internally, they must have figured out something that
> > works for them.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jack Hamilton
> > jfh@alumni.stanford.org
> > Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Apr 21, 2010, at 22:21 , Alan Churchill wrote:
> >
> > > EG is a batch submit application. You submit code to a SAS server and
> > > get
> > the results back as a log/list/dataset. The log is not available since it
> > is
> > not happening locally.
> > >
> > > I think this can be changed but I will leave that up to R&D.
> > >
> > > Alan
> > >
> > > Alan Churchill
> > > Savian
> > > Work: 719-687-5954
> > > Cell: 719-310-4870
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mary [mailto:mlhoward@avalon.net]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 2:11 PM
> > > To: Alan Churchill
> > > Cc: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > >
> > > But Jack's point was that it was not the same functionality. Does it
> > really not let you look at the log while the program is running? To a
> > programmer, the ability to do so is huge.
> > >
> > > -Mary
> > >
> > > --- alan.churchill@SAVIAN.NET wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Alan Churchill <alan.churchill@SAVIAN.NET>
> > > To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > > Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:32:53 -0600
> > >
> > > Jack,
> > >
> > > You just let them know what you want with this post.
> > >
> > > BTW, you can run UI stuff under EG. Just make an EG add-in. Maybe this
> > > is
> > a good time to move away from AF.
> > >
> > > On the DM issue, what difference does it make what banner it is under
> > > as long as you get the same functionality? If it is a DM replacement
> > > running under the EG banner, same thing IMO. I think we need to wait
> > > and see how EG
> > > 4.3 plays out and how many issues remain after it is released.
> > >
> > > Agreed on the latter point. We see too many delays of the fundamentals
> > while waiting for verticals.
> > >
> > > Alan
> > >
> > > Alan Churchill
> > > Savian
> > > Work: 719-687-5954
> > > Cell: 719-310-4870
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jack Hamilton [mailto:jfh@alumni.stanford.org]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 12:58 PM
> > > To: Alan Churchill
> > > Cc: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: [SAS-L] Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > >
> > > Did the birdie explain why they have not made EG a functional
> > > replacement
> > for the Display Manager, or if they plan to do so?
> > >
> > > Missing:
> > >
> > > - Ability to debug data steps.
> > >
> > > - Ability to view log while program is running.
> > >
> > > - Ability to prompt user for information.
> > >
> > > - Ability to use AF programs (GUI).
> > >
> > >
> > > It doesn't really matter to me whether I use EG or DM, as long as
> > > whatever
> > tool they give me can do what I want it to do. But for now, EG is missing
> > too much functionality.
> > >
> > > And if .Net and C# are so great and make programming so easy, why don't
> > they recode the Display Manager as well?
> > >
> > > And I don't think that the primary reason for recent product delays has
> > been development speed - it's been the decision to emphasis SAS Solutions
> > over Foundation SAS, and to make the base product wait for Solutions to
> > catch up rather than having the Solutions run on back versions of SAS.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jack Hamilton
> > > jfh@alumni.stanford.org
> > > Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Apr 21, 2010, at 8:15 , Alan Churchill wrote:
> > >
> > >> Full disclosure, part of the info is from birdies, part from me. The
> > > wording is all mine.
> > >> =================================================================
> > >>
> > >> The future of DM is written: it is deprecated.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, you do get to keep it but it will be deprecated opening up the
> > >> very
> > > real possibility that it will go away at some point. However, DDE is
> > > still
> > in Office despite being deprecated for a long, long time. My guess is that
> > DM will be around for a long time as well. Newer products that are
> > server-based will NOT have DM available.
> > >>
> > >> For EG 4.3, the new editor is coded in C# and runs on WPF. However,
> > >> the
> > > code logic was lifted from DM so you should have what you want. I want
> > > to
> > see programming templates for EG and have expressed that desire to SAS R&D
> > so we concur. For those who do not know about WPF, this is a godsend for
> > future functionality in the editor. It is also, ding ding ding, the same
> > code base that Silverlight uses. EG on the web? EG on your mobile devices?
> > > Your editor and code available from an airport kiosk or even your
> > > set-top box on your TV (Silverlight 4 supports that. Just announced.)
> > >>
> > >> I saw an example at a Microsoft convention a few years ago where they
> > >> had
> > > some particular functionality under older technology that took 20,000
> > > lines of code. They worked on adding it to .NET and, over time, they
> > > changed the
> > > 20,000 lines of code into 3. Microsoft has bet everything on .NET, lots
> > > of
> > companies are tied into the ecosystem, lots of code samples exist, etc.
> > Now
> > SAS can either use its resources to enhance functionality in, say, a code
> > module with 20,000 lines of code or they can move forward and use the .NET
> > way which will save them a ton of labor. Faster product releases, more
> > functionality, more up-to-date, faster QA cycles, no memory leaks, better
> > editors, etc. Toss in the little bit of happiness that your MFC classes
> > may
> > not work in a newer environment (Windows 7, RDC, etc.) and you have to
> > make
> > a call as to when a migration happens. SAS has made that call.
> > >>
> > >> Alan
> > >>
> > >> Alan Churchill
> > >> Savian
> > >> Work: 719-687-5954
> > >> Cell: 719-310-4870
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Mary [mailto:mlhoward@avalon.net]
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 8:51 AM
> > >> To: Alan Churchill
> > >> Cc: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > >> Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > >>
> > >> Yes, but for SAS Institute not to make needed improvements to DM is
> > >> very
> > > similar to tossing it. There's much in it already that desparately need
> > improvement and that seems very antiquated, and programmers may be
> > "pushed"
> > > over to EG if the pricing structure to companies makes it more favorable
> > for companies to install EG than DM; so there is a very real possibility
> > that programmers will not get to keep their DM even if they want to
> > (similar
> > to the line that was repeated during the health care debate "if you like
> > your health insurance you will get to keep it", where the reality for most
> > people is that it is where someone is employed that determines their
> > health
> > insurance coverage, and if they change employers, they do not get to keep
> > > their previous health insurance). Thus it is whether SAS Institute is
> > > going to push companies via its pricing towards EG, as it is doing with
> > education, that will determine the future of DM.
> > >>
> > >> But it is very dissapointing that SI has apparently decided not to
> > >> fix the
> > > problems with Display Manager since it is the platform that most SAS
> > programmers use to program in, and thus it is not supporting this
> > constituency.
> > >> Yes, getting an environment for the programmers over in EG (which I
> > > haven't used) if they want us to move over there would then be
> > > essential.
> > >>
> > >> -Mary
> > >>
> > >> --- alan.churchill@SAVIAN.NET wrote:
> > >>
> > >> From: Alan Churchill <alan.churchill@SAVIAN.NET>
> > >> To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > >> Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > >> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:42:57 -0600
> > >>
> > >> There are major gaps in understanding. First of all, as I have stated
> > > numerous times, DM is not going away. That is pretty simple and
> > straightforward. It just will not have new development or, if any, it will
> > be minimal.
> > >>
> > >> EG uses components of DM inside of it. The program editor, for
> > >> example, is
> > > DM. To say DM was ignored and tossed is not correct.
> > >>
> > >> EG was built as a tool for Windows users to use w/o having to have
> > >> SAS
> > > installed on a desktop. Its origins go way back. I saw it in an early
> > incarnation 10-12 years ago. Work may have started on it before the
> > Enhanced
> > Editor but I am a fuzzy on the exact dates.
> > >>
> > >> EG, currently, is mostly built on .NET which is much easier to work
> > >> with
> > > than MFC (its original base) or AF. It is natural for SAS to move away
> > from a hodge-podge of stuff that AF and MFC encompassed and move toward
> > .NET
> > which is an integrated framework. I also confirmed that parts of EG are
> > now
> > moving over to WPF which offers some really exciting possibilities.
> > >>
> > >> If you are a SAS programmer today and want DM, you need Base SAS
> > > installed. That is not feasible for most companies.
> > >>
> > >> Having Windows apps on the .NET Framework using WPF and other .NET
> > > technologies just makes perfect sense. It will lead to faster dev times,
> > easier integration, stronger tool bases, etc. You see that in EG, AMO, and
> > JMP right now. However, if DM is what you know and love, there is no
> > reason
> > to leave. You will miss out on the cool features of EG but that is a
> > personal choice.
> > >>
> > >> SAS birdies, please correct me if I missed some of the
> > >> nuances/history
> > > here. I think the above is a fair representation.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Alan
> > >>
> > >> Alan Churchill
> > >> Savian
> > >> Work: 719-687-5954
> > >> Cell: 719-310-4870
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Mary [mailto:mlhoward@AVALON.NET]
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 10:01 AM
> > >> Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > >>
> > >> Yes, I think I understand what you are trying to say- let me try
> > >> stating
> > > it in better English-
> > >>
> > >> ****
> > >> In order for SAS to compete against SPSS, which for a long time had
> > >> hidden
> > > its code and had everything in menus, SAS first developed Analyst within
> > Display Manager, before putting its focus on Enterprise Guide.
> > >>
> > >> They were developing First Insight (a pale copy of JMP) before
> > >> supressing
> > > it, and now present parts of it in separate products such as SAS IML
> > Studio and JMP (which is now more accepted by Goodnight than before).
> > >>
> > >> I've [Andre says] never seen SAS offering integration for the same
> > >> price
> > > of a supplementatal product, but now that Linux and R are present, they
> > decided that rather than building a simple free direct access to R, that
> > they would construct IML Studio, a separate product with a separate
> > license.
> > >> *****
> > >>
> > >> Interesting thoughts- perhaps the idea was making income on all these
> > > separate products with the idea that people would get multiples, whereas
> > now there is a need to integrate Display Manager with Enterprise Guide,
> > which seems difficult to do since they Enterprise Guide has grown on its
> > own
> > without regard to Display Manager.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks.
> > >>
> > >> -Mary
> > >>
> > >> --- wielki@ined.fr wrote:
> > >>
> > >> From: Andre Wielki <wielki@ined.fr>
> > >> To: mlhoward@avalon.net
> > >> Subject: Re: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > >> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:53:47 +0200
> > >>
> > >> Mary
> > >> The reason was SPSS which has since a long time everything in menus
> > > (hiding the code) so first they develop Analyst inside the DM before
> > > putting the scope on EG
> > >>
> > >> the same proceess in matter of internal concurrence (sas-jmp) They
> > >> were
> > > developping first insight (a pale copy of jmp) before suppressing it
> > > in the future and presenting now parts in separate products
> > >> sas iml studio and JMP (now more accepted by Goodnight than before)
> > >>
> > >> Finally i never saw since years SAS doing a gift in making
> > >> integration for
> > > the same price of the supplemental product But now that Linux and R are
> > present, they decide in place of building a simple free direct access to R
> > ,
> > to construct the iml studio, a separate product with a separate licence.
> > >>
> > >> IMHO
> > >>
> > >> Andre
> > >>
> > >> Le 20/04/2010 15:53, Mary a écrit :
> > >>> We were just discussing this; the major problem with this is that
> > >>> SAS
> > > seems to want to make SAS programmers make a huge jump from Display
> > Manager over to Enterprise Guide with barely any warning or preparation
> > for
> > this.
> > >>>
> > >>> Does anyone know anything about the history of Enterprise Guide? In
> > > particular, why was there a decision to make an entirely new product
> > rather than developing the EG features within Display Manager, if the long
> > term objective was to abandon Display Manager? Or was no thought given to
> > the SAS Developers at all?
> > >>>
> > >>> -Mary
> > >>>
> > >>> --- Jack.Hamilton@KP.ORG wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> From: Jack.Hamilton@KP.ORG
> > >>> To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > >>> Subject: Notes from SAS Global Forum
> > >>> Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:20:40 -0700
> > >>>
> > >>> Not in any particular order:
> > >>>
> > >>> - SAS is pushing Enterprise Guide over SAS for Windows Display
> > >>> Manager as
> > > the primary interface for users. In the EG 4.3 code editor, there will
> > code completion and context sensitive help. This will be very helpful. The
> > person I talked to said that this would not be put into the SAS for
> > Windows
> > Enhanced Editor.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> André WIELKI
> > >> INED (Institut National d'Etudes Démographiques)
> > >> Service Informatique
> > >> 133 Boulevard Davout 75980 Paris Cedex 20
> > >> mél : wielki@ined.fr tél : 33 (0) 1 56 06 21 54
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with
> Hotmail.
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5=
>
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1 | 
