Date: Wed, 3 Jul 1996 00:31:44 +1000
Reply-To: Jerry Le Breton <lebreton@SPIRIT.COM.AU>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From: Jerry Le Breton <lebreton@SPIRIT.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: SAS AF Executable
I'm a bit late joining this thread and its pretty well all been said by now,
but I'd just like to add my name to the list of disgruntled SAS AF
consultants/developers (lest SI think I'm happy with their current policy).
I'd also like to complain about the miriad of modules for which a separate
licence (and money) is needed. My current client (busy sheding staff and
cutting costs) has a 100 user licence and figured they were paying more than
enough already, without having to fork out even more for SAS/Share to
implement an AF application I proposed. So another opportunity bites the dust.
Other applications here are being migrated to DB2 so I've been trying to
point out the advantages of SAS/Access to the organisation. Its bad enough
that SAS is still not considered a "real" IT tool by most "real" IT managers
and staff, so then telling them its only going to cost... Well, they hear
the word 'cost' and I don't get a chance to finish the sentence. Oh, yes,
and how about getting SAS/Assist on the mainframe too...
One area I developed an AF application for, is keen to see it extended and
distributed throughout the organisation. But there's the cost of the extra
licences. Instead of becoming a major, high profile application, flying the
flag for SAS, it'll remain buried in a user area
with its dozen or so users.
It doesn't matter that the incremental cost of extra licences may be small,
the client is constantly being reminded of The Cost of SAS.
Its been said thousands of times: SAS has an image problem; compounded by
their pricing policy, the lack of a run-time version, and their failure to
fully utilise third party developers (SI Australia doesn't even operate the
Quality Partner Program).
Some years ago, I stopped the endless quest for experience on all the latest
software and hardware, and decided to specialize in SAS because I thought it
was going places. But maybe its just going to stay in its niche after all.
And, as long as their revenue is growing, SI will probably feel they don't
need to change anything. Just like Apple in their heyday. I share Don
Stanley's concerns: is being a SAS specialist really in my best interest?
I'd like the answer to be Yes, but SI don't do much to help. If only SAS
was a "real", mainstream product.
Jerry Le Breton
Independent SAS Consultant (for the time being)