Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 02:55:56 GMT
Reply-To: Julian S Visch <math5jsv@MATH.CANTERBURY.AC.NZ>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From: Julian S Visch <math5jsv@MATH.CANTERBURY.AC.NZ>
Organization: Department of Mathematics and Statistics,
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, NewZealand
Subject: Re: A BETTER SAS, part 1
In article <mdemilia-ya02408000R1202971655290001@news.eclipse.net>,
email@example.com (Michael S. DeMilia) writes:
|> SAS Institute has a LONG way to go in improving their user interface. Here
|> are a few suggestions towards a better SAS:
|> 1) All dialog boxes, windows, etc. for all operating systems should conform
|> to standard Windows 95/NT4 and Macintosh human interface guidelines. UNIX
|> and other systems may require some minor implementation modifications;
|> however, the tools are out there for porting such an interface to UNIX, so
|> there is no excuse for SAS not to make use of them.
Personally I wouldn't want a windows 95 type dialog box, they could be greatly
|> 2) The "Globals" and "Locals" menus currently used in Windows & Mac
|> versions of SAS are representative of the lack of thought that SAS put into
|> it's user interface. It's obvious that it based upon an engineer's view
|> of what procedures are available to the user based upon the current window
|> they are in. A user interface should transcend engineering and MAKE SENSE.
They make perfect sense to me.
|> A "Tools" menu, a "Project" menu, an "Analysis" menu, a "Graphs" menu, and
|> a "Develop" menu would be alot more intuitive for the main environment,
|> and then alternate scenarios could be presented based upon other windows
|> that you are in.
The graphs menu I can see a point to, but the rest I wouldn't care for.
|> 3) The program editor should be converted into a true text editor with
|> find/replace capabilities.
I agree there, so why not emacs, that is available on all systems, plus it is
has greater capabilities than any other editor that I am aware, plus other
packages are already using it as an inbuilt editor e.g. matlab. Plus it is
|> project window should be is BBEdit, a Macintosh text editor by BareBones
|> You also should be able to visually manage output in a WYSIWYG page
|> layout. The Log window isn't so far off track, but it could be enhanced
Better output I would agree with, even better would be if the output could be
in LaTeX format.
|> 7) Traditional SAS programming would still be necessary for complex data
|> management by the power user. But, the average scientist with a simple
|> analysis could do the job quickly using windows, menus, and dialog box.
|> User actions could be recorded as macros (like Word or Excel macros, not
|> SAS macros) for easy automation.
SAS already uses lots of memory, I would hate to think how much more memory
it would require for that.
|> is totally illogical. Macintosh Apple Guide-type Help assistance should
|> replace the current SAS HELP system. Tutorials could also be implemented
|> in this manner.
I agree that there are problems with SAS help, and some means should be
implemented so that more than just experts can find their way around in it.
|> please get rid of the punch card facilities (and syntax) before the
|> millennium is upon us! It's just plain embarrassing.
What?! We still use punch cards in our department, they make great scap paper
But I agree, using them for actual computer use has gone the way of the Moa.
|> 13) SAS GRAPH...where do I start? I could write a book on what's wrong
|> with SAS GRAPH.
Another grype I have is getting rid of them once I have produced the things.