Comparison of JasperSoft , QlikView and PowerPivot BI Tools
A Comparison of BI Tools is presented below
Aspect
|
JasperSoft BI
|
QlikView
|
PowerPivot
|
Completeness of the BI Stack
|
Complete BI stack along associated components from partner vendors
|
Mature Analysis and Visualization stack. Lacks completeness in OLAP and ETL capabilities.
|
A isolated solution that requires several other components (SSIS, SSRS, SSAS, Office 2010, Sharepoint 2010) to make it a complete stack.
|
Roadmap
|
Rated in Gartner’s magic quadrant 2011-2012 as a niche player
First BI player to deliver scalable BI over cloud
|
Rated in Gartner’s magic quadrant 2011-2012 as a visionary
|
?
|
Supported platforms
|
ALL – owing to being a java application
|
?
|
Windows only.
|
Architecture
|
Traditional BI
|
Non-traditional BI that does not need any dimensional modeling. Uses a technique called Associative Query Logic (AQL) that tries to reason/infer data relationships. But this may not always be correct.
|
Mimics QlikView
|
Report delivery & accessibility
|
Web Portal.
No deployment overheads
|
Web Portal
No deployment overheads
|
MS Excel 2010+
(or requires Sharepoint 2010)
More administrative overhead.
|
Quality of User Interface
|
Moderate
|
Sleek interface
|
Sleek interface delivered over Silverlight plugin.
|
End User friendliness
|
Medium
|
High
|
High
|
True OLAP
|
YES via Mondrian Engine. Supports MDX Querying
|
NO
|
NO
|
Report scheduling, email etc..
|
YES
|
NO
|
NO
|
Self Service BI
|
YES
|
YES
|
YES
|
Supported Endpoints
|
WEB
|
WEB, MOBILE etc..
|
EXCEL 2010
|
Deployments
|
175,000 in 100 countries; over 14,000 commercial customers
|
19,000 customers in more than 100 countries
|
?
|
TCO
|
HIGH
|
LOW
|
MODERATE
|
Cost
|
LOW
|
VERY HIGH
|
?
|
In Memory Capabilities
|
YES
|
BY DEFAULT
|
BY DEFAULT
|
Performance
|
ACCEPTABLE
|
GOOD
|
GOOD
|
Flexible Licensing
|
Has both Community and Enterprise Editions. OLAP requires Enterprise Edition.
|
?
|
Has a personal edition that is free. But users cannot share insights and this leads to very fragmented BI deployment across the enterprise.
|
Scalability
|
GOOD
|
LOW because of problems with the in-memory model that fails under higher loads. Also is a RAM guzzler.
|
LOW
|
Development Effort
|
Moderate because of it’s traditional BI nature. (build model – deploy model). But TCO will be lower because the cost spent upfront in building a true OLAP model will reap benefits later on.
|
Low
|
Low if end user has sufficient Excel skills.
|
Maintainability
|
Good
|
Cannot say
|
Low because of data and analysis fragmentation.
|
Supportability
|
Very high. Due to it’s open source nature, there will always be a plethora of trained manpower available.
Commercial support option available from JasperSoft.
Additional supportability via excellent documentation, knowledge repositories and books.
|
Cannot say
|
Cannot say
|
Marginal Cost to implement changes etc.
|
Moderate.
For Ad-Hoc reporting, no additional development time/cost required. Additional OLAP data mart development will require development efforts
|
Moderate
|
Low.
Since this is pure Self Service, it is left to the capabilities of the end user to be able to develop his own reports.
|
In order to generate the comparison report between the various BI tools, the following articles have been referred to.
QlikView
No OLAP-style analysis
QlikView does not offer the richness of MDX and other logical query languages provided by traditional on premise BI products. These languages enable end users to create far more powerful calculations (e.g. via addressing cells positionally in either a materialized or logical cube) than are possible in QlikView. QlikView provides a user interface for users to interactively explore and analyze information based on associations between different data sources. This is a unique approach but because it is not a logical query language, it has limitations.
No Pixel-perfect report writing
QlikView lacks some of the advanced capabilities required for creating highly formatted reports. QlikView is designed for interactive analysis and not for report writing. To create a formatted report in QlikView requires the use of macros and the duplication and maintenance of QlikView objects. Previously created QlikView objects need to be cloned and placed into a “Report Section” in QlikView.
QlikView takes shortcuts that can result in more work
QlikView makes no distinction between columns that are facts and columns that are attributes. While this is designed to encourage data exploration, it makes the creation of well-defined formatted reports more complicated and time consuming.
Comments
Post a Comment