[R] Re: R or Splus

[J.Brainard@uea.ac.uk]

Thanks to all for the input.

rgentlem at jimmy.harvard.edu said:
>If you really want help --

no, I just thought I'd waste some bandwidth.  :-)


>If on the other hand you
>just want some reassurance that Splus is indeed a commerical package

oh gee, thanks, I wasn't sure about that.


When I had said:
>> R can't handle files named x.  If I can use Splus, should I just do that?

RG added:
  >This is simply untrue. Perhaps you could read those discussions
  >somewhat more carefully.

There was definitely a recent message to the effect that someone was
trying to do something with an object named 'x', and the reply came
back that it wasn't possible -- there was a bug that prevented
one calling an object x and using the desired function.  
Was the function glm, perhaps?
I've overwritten that message, now, so can't quote directly.


G.Janacek at uea.ac.uk said:
> UEA runs both  R and Splus. The Splus license in on the Unix boxes. 
>The version of R os  I am told a buggy one and the current one is 
>better.

I think this explains a lot about my situation.  It's version 0.90.1 of R
on DEC alphas I've been trying to use.  And I was misinformed
when told we didn't have Splus any more (arrrrrrrrrgggg)


However... I could become an R convert if I'm told it's

a) mind-bogglingly simple to install on Win Nt
   there are firm limits to my geek credentials

b) can handle cluster analysis with 2000 records (mclust, preferred,
   although I'd take kmeans if nec'y).  Splus 5.0 on the 
   Manchester Cray has been falling over on this, much to my great
   annoyance, no matter how large a workspace I give mclust, hclust
   or kmeans, etc.


mark at myatt.demon.co.uk noted:
>I don't think that there are any "graphic-
>interface-only" versions of SPSS. 

well, what we have (seems to be version 6.14) is definitely pull-down
menus, the lot -- like using Micro$oft Excel -- 
but slower than treacle on an Artic day to run.


>Of course, there is some pride in being an SPlus, and by implication R,
>user as these systems have the reputation of being tools for illuminati.

I adore Splus when it works.


One last thing:
ernesto at neptuno.ipimar.pt mentioned:
>I had a S+ license during 1998 and I'm now looking again at 
>S+ because I want to use the S+SpatialStats.

I guess you mean the Arc-S+ links?  The 8 or 9 functions they
were flogging about 5 years ago or so for 800 quid or so?  
(That's $ 11000 or so to the Yanks).

I don't know if the Spatial modeule has been improved wildly, but
a friend of mine sat down and wrote one of the functions in an
hour once (and he's an Splus person, not an AML person, which is
where I come from).  Last time I looked at them there were 8 or 9 
utilitites in the S+Arc link and all but one I reckoned 
I could cobble together from
simple AML function calls (I have done this for other purposes).

What I'm saying is, it really may be a waste of money to get the
Spatial modules.


-julii

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._