"Scott Allen" <scott@nospam.odetocode.com> wrote in message
news:1kd211dnsd0limldqaokmth3jfdu0gn7v4@4ax.com...
> The thing about SSRS is that if someone has already paid for a SQL
> Server license - then they own SSRS. Many people on the groups don't
> realize this. It's fiscally prudent to at least evaluate what you
> already own.
>
> --
> Scott
> http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:22:05 -0800, "Brian Bischof"
> <Brian@NoSpamBischofSystems.com> wrote:
>
>>The thing that makes Crystal Reports confusing is that there are sooo many
>>versions of it out there and you never know which version someone is
>>talking
>>about in these posts.
>>
>>Here is my take on things: CR.NET is considered an upsell product. Thus,
>>you
>>get it free in the box with the hopes that you'll upgrade. Given that, the
>>retail versions are much better. The latest version of Crystal, XI, has
>>many
>>upgrades and bug fixes and the report processing performance has been
>>improved and has better exporting. All around it's a much better product.
>>Unfortunately, CR.NET 2003 isn't such a hot product and continues to give
>>CR
>>a bad name. Of course, CR isn't perfect - no question about that. But
>>without a doubt the latest version XI is a big step forward. Plus, they
>>have
>>it available as a free 30 day download on their site.
>>
>>The problem I have with RS is that it is a 1.0 product and it has a lot of
>>problems, but people recommend it like it's reporting nirvana. I've yet to
>>use a MS 1.0 product and have it run without a hitch (or any company's
>>product for that matter). Reporting Services is great if you want to do
>>simple reports and are willing to do lots of manual coding to fill in the
>>gaps that MS left out. I see people on the newsgroups saying, "RS is
>>great!
>>You need to try it out. I got my reports to run in no time." Everything is
>>great when you run a few wizards. But then when you dig a little deeper
>>into
>>the feature set you see questions like, "Hey, I want to do X and it won't
>>do
>>it. Why not?"; "Why do my Excel/PDF exports keep getting screwed up?";
>>"Why
>>is SQL Server performance so slow now?"; "How do I make it read from a
>>DataSet?" and "Why does it cost $20K to support ASP.NET Forms
>>Authentication?" There are usually three common answers to these
>>questions:
>>1) Write your own custom extensions, 2) Rewrite your stored procedures to
>>do
>>all the work RS won't do, and 3) Wait for a future version. Let's hope
>>your
>>customers are patient while you do all this extra coding or wait till it
>>gets fixed in a future version. Plus, if you plan on doing any heavy
>>reporting with it then you need to put it on a separate server ($5K
>>license)
>>or else your SQL box will get hammered b/c it is resource intensive. It's
>>only free for companies that don't have much SQL activity.
>>
>>All in all, I think RS definitely makes a lot of aspects of writing
>>reports
>>easier. In fact, the Table object is pretty damn stellar and nothing else
>>compares to it. RS is a great tool that can crank out a lot of reports
>>very
>>fast. But it's a 1.0 product that is still missing a lot of features. I've
>>seen NG posts from people saying, "I convinced my manager/client to go
>>with
>>RS and now it doesn't do the things I assumed would work. Someone help!"
>>The
>>answer is "it will be fixed in a future release". RS still needs a few
>>more
>>versions under its belt before it can be recommended carte blanche to
>>everyone.
>>
>>
>>"rk" <krakesh@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1108419323.164312.146330@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> The biggest issue with Crystal running on a server is that the crystal
>>> components keep leaking memory and it leaves the server crawling after
>>> some time (at least that's what we have encountered on our server). It
>>> is alright with a client-server app where crystal is running on the
>>> client side in which case the memory gets released as soon as the
>>> client app exits.
>>>
>>> Apart from that there are issues with deploying it - it works on some
>>> systems and fails with some license issue on others (I have also posted
>>> this issue and of course, there was no response). There are numerous
>>> posts regarding this issue and its resolution but one thing is clear
>>> that there is no clear cut resolution to that.
>>>
>>> Given the lack of support on Crystal I would advise for a home grown
>>> system or RS (I am sure it will only improve with time).
>>>
>>> --rk
>>>
>>
>

> And u certainly don't have to multi-post this to every newsgroup. posting
to
> the crystal newsgroup would be sufficient.

"Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message
news:%23Ec9nBvEFHA.228@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> And u certainly don't have to multi-post this to every newsgroup. posting
to
> the crystal newsgroup would be sufficient.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Alvin Bruney [Microsoft MVP ASP.NET]
>
> [Shameless Author plug]
> The Microsoft Office Web Components Black Book with .NET
> Now Available @ http://www.lulu.com/owc
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "Scott Allen" <scott@nospam.odetocode.com> wrote in message
> news:1kd211dnsd0limldqaokmth3jfdu0gn7v4@4ax.com...
> > The thing about SSRS is that if someone has already paid for a SQL
> > Server license - then they own SSRS. Many people on the groups don't
> > realize this. It's fiscally prudent to at least evaluate what you
> > already own.
> >
> > --
> > Scott
> > http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:22:05 -0800, "Brian Bischof"
> > <Brian@NoSpamBischofSystems.com> wrote:
> >
> >>The thing that makes Crystal Reports confusing is that there are sooo
many
> >>versions of it out there and you never know which version someone is
> >>talking
> >>about in these posts.
> >>
> >>Here is my take on things: CR.NET is considered an upsell product. Thus,
> >>you
> >>get it free in the box with the hopes that you'll upgrade. Given that,
the
> >>retail versions are much better. The latest version of Crystal, XI, has
> >>many
> >>upgrades and bug fixes and the report processing performance has been
> >>improved and has better exporting. All around it's a much better
product.
> >>Unfortunately, CR.NET 2003 isn't such a hot product and continues to
give
> >>CR
> >>a bad name. Of course, CR isn't perfect - no question about that. But
> >>without a doubt the latest version XI is a big step forward. Plus, they
> >>have
> >>it available as a free 30 day download on their site.
> >>
> >>The problem I have with RS is that it is a 1.0 product and it has a lot
of
> >>problems, but people recommend it like it's reporting nirvana. I've yet
to
> >>use a MS 1.0 product and have it run without a hitch (or any company's
> >>product for that matter). Reporting Services is great if you want to do
> >>simple reports and are willing to do lots of manual coding to fill in
the
> >>gaps that MS left out. I see people on the newsgroups saying, "RS is
> >>great!
> >>You need to try it out. I got my reports to run in no time." Everything
is
> >>great when you run a few wizards. But then when you dig a little deeper
> >>into
> >>the feature set you see questions like, "Hey, I want to do X and it
won't
> >>do
> >>it. Why not?"; "Why do my Excel/PDF exports keep getting screwed up?";
> >>"Why
> >>is SQL Server performance so slow now?"; "How do I make it read from a
> >>DataSet?" and "Why does it cost $20K to support ASP.NET Forms
> >>Authentication?" There are usually three common answers to these
> >>questions:
> >>1) Write your own custom extensions, 2) Rewrite your stored procedures
to
> >>do
> >>all the work RS won't do, and 3) Wait for a future version. Let's hope
> >>your
> >>customers are patient while you do all this extra coding or wait till it
> >>gets fixed in a future version. Plus, if you plan on doing any heavy
> >>reporting with it then you need to put it on a separate server ($5K
> >>license)
> >>or else your SQL box will get hammered b/c it is resource intensive.
It's
> >>only free for companies that don't have much SQL activity.
> >>
> >>All in all, I think RS definitely makes a lot of aspects of writing
> >>reports
> >>easier. In fact, the Table object is pretty damn stellar and nothing
else
> >>compares to it. RS is a great tool that can crank out a lot of reports
> >>very
> >>fast. But it's a 1.0 product that is still missing a lot of features.
I've
> >>seen NG posts from people saying, "I convinced my manager/client to go
> >>with
> >>RS and now it doesn't do the things I assumed would work. Someone help!"
> >>The
> >>answer is "it will be fixed in a future release". RS still needs a few
> >>more
> >>versions under its belt before it can be recommended carte blanche to
> >>everyone.
> >>
> >>
> >>"rk" <krakesh@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:1108419323.164312.146330@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >>> The biggest issue with Crystal running on a server is that the crystal
> >>> components keep leaking memory and it leaves the server crawling after
> >>> some time (at least that's what we have encountered on our server).
It
> >>> is alright with a client-server app where crystal is running on the
> >>> client side in which case the memory gets released as soon as the
> >>> client app exits.
> >>>
> >>> Apart from that there are issues with deploying it - it works on some
> >>> systems and fails with some license issue on others (I have also
posted
> >>> this issue and of course, there was no response). There are numerous
> >>> posts regarding this issue and its resolution but one thing is clear
> >>> that there is no clear cut resolution to that.
> >>>
> >>> Given the lack of support on Crystal I would advise for a home grown
> >>> system or RS (I am sure it will only improve with time).
> >>>
> >>> --rk
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>

"LP" <lp@a.com> wrote in message
news:OICquiqEFHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >Any queries that return > 50,000 rows will kill IIS +
>> Crystal.
>
>
> that's really good to know. I can see them wanting to export all data for
> 1st quater which is about that record count.
> As far as MS Reporting services from what I saw it is truely is MS version
> 1
> product.
> I am leaning towards just developing straight forward web application and
> my
> own export to Excel functionality.
> Thank you all!
>

>Why didn't you only reply to crystal NG then?

"LP" <lp@a.com> wrote in message
news:%23onoFG3EFHA.624@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> And u certainly don't have to multi-post this to every newsgroup. posting
> to
>> the crystal newsgroup would be sufficient.
>
>
> No I certainly don't have to. Why didn't you only reply to crystal NG
> then?
>
>
>
> "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <vapor at steaming post office> wrote in message
> news:%23Ec9nBvEFHA.228@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> And u certainly don't have to multi-post this to every newsgroup. posting
> to
>> the crystal newsgroup would be sufficient.
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Alvin Bruney [Microsoft MVP ASP.NET]
>>
>> [Shameless Author plug]
>> The Microsoft Office Web Components Black Book with .NET
>> Now Available @ http://www.lulu.com/owc
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> "Scott Allen" <scott@nospam.odetocode.com> wrote in message
>> news:1kd211dnsd0limldqaokmth3jfdu0gn7v4@4ax.com...
>> > The thing about SSRS is that if someone has already paid for a SQL
>> > Server license - then they own SSRS. Many people on the groups don't
>> > realize this. It's fiscally prudent to at least evaluate what you
>> > already own.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Scott
>> > http://www.OdeToCode.com/blogs/scott/
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:22:05 -0800, "Brian Bischof"
>> > <Brian@NoSpamBischofSystems.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>The thing that makes Crystal Reports confusing is that there are sooo
> many
>> >>versions of it out there and you never know which version someone is
>> >>talking
>> >>about in these posts.
>> >>
>> >>Here is my take on things: CR.NET is considered an upsell product.
>> >>Thus,
>> >>you
>> >>get it free in the box with the hopes that you'll upgrade. Given that,
> the
>> >>retail versions are much better. The latest version of Crystal, XI, has
>> >>many
>> >>upgrades and bug fixes and the report processing performance has been
>> >>improved and has better exporting. All around it's a much better
> product.
>> >>Unfortunately, CR.NET 2003 isn't such a hot product and continues to
> give
>> >>CR
>> >>a bad name. Of course, CR isn't perfect - no question about that. But
>> >>without a doubt the latest version XI is a big step forward. Plus, they
>> >>have
>> >>it available as a free 30 day download on their site.
>> >>
>> >>The problem I have with RS is that it is a 1.0 product and it has a lot
> of
>> >>problems, but people recommend it like it's reporting nirvana. I've yet
> to
>> >>use a MS 1.0 product and have it run without a hitch (or any company's
>> >>product for that matter). Reporting Services is great if you want to do
>> >>simple reports and are willing to do lots of manual coding to fill in
> the
>> >>gaps that MS left out. I see people on the newsgroups saying, "RS is
>> >>great!
>> >>You need to try it out. I got my reports to run in no time." Everything
> is
>> >>great when you run a few wizards. But then when you dig a little deeper
>> >>into
>> >>the feature set you see questions like, "Hey, I want to do X and it
> won't
>> >>do
>> >>it. Why not?"; "Why do my Excel/PDF exports keep getting screwed up?";
>> >>"Why
>> >>is SQL Server performance so slow now?"; "How do I make it read from a
>> >>DataSet?" and "Why does it cost $20K to support ASP.NET Forms
>> >>Authentication?" There are usually three common answers to these
>> >>questions:
>> >>1) Write your own custom extensions, 2) Rewrite your stored procedures
> to
>> >>do
>> >>all the work RS won't do, and 3) Wait for a future version. Let's hope
>> >>your
>> >>customers are patient while you do all this extra coding or wait till
>> >>it
>> >>gets fixed in a future version. Plus, if you plan on doing any heavy
>> >>reporting with it then you need to put it on a separate server ($5K
>> >>license)
>> >>or else your SQL box will get hammered b/c it is resource intensive.
> It's
>> >>only free for companies that don't have much SQL activity.
>> >>
>> >>All in all, I think RS definitely makes a lot of aspects of writing
>> >>reports
>> >>easier. In fact, the Table object is pretty damn stellar and nothing
> else
>> >>compares to it. RS is a great tool that can crank out a lot of reports
>> >>very
>> >>fast. But it's a 1.0 product that is still missing a lot of features.
> I've
>> >>seen NG posts from people saying, "I convinced my manager/client to go
>> >>with
>> >>RS and now it doesn't do the things I assumed would work. Someone
>> >>help!"
>> >>The
>> >>answer is "it will be fixed in a future release". RS still needs a few
>> >>more
>> >>versions under its belt before it can be recommended carte blanche to
>> >>everyone.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>"rk" <krakesh@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:1108419323.164312.146330@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >>> The biggest issue with Crystal running on a server is that the
>> >>> crystal
>> >>> components keep leaking memory and it leaves the server crawling
>> >>> after
>> >>> some time (at least that's what we have encountered on our server).
> It
>> >>> is alright with a client-server app where crystal is running on the
>> >>> client side in which case the memory gets released as soon as the
>> >>> client app exits.
>> >>>
>> >>> Apart from that there are issues with deploying it - it works on some
>> >>> systems and fails with some license issue on others (I have also
> posted
>> >>> this issue and of course, there was no response). There are numerous
>> >>> posts regarding this issue and its resolution but one thing is clear
>> >>> that there is no clear cut resolution to that.
>> >>>
>> >>> Given the lack of support on Crystal I would advise for a home grown
>> >>> system or RS (I am sure it will only improve with time).
>> >>>
>> >>> --rk
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

> Does it have to be web based?

> I reckon access is still one of the best reporting tools around.

"Andy O'Neill" <aon14nocannedmeat@lycos.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e6kQd.97690$B8.76185@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "LP" <lp@a.com> wrote in message
> news:OICquiqEFHA.3368@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > >Any queries that return > 50,000 rows will kill IIS +
> >> Crystal.
> >
> >
> > that's really good to know. I can see them wanting to export all data
for
> > 1st quater which is about that record count.
> > As far as MS Reporting services from what I saw it is truely is MS
version
> > 1
> > product.
> > I am leaning towards just developing straight forward web application
and
> > my
> > own export to Excel functionality.
> > Thank you all!
> >
>
>
> Does it have to be web based?
>
> I reckon access is still one of the best reporting tools around.
> Exporting data to excel would be simple, although working with it in
access
> is often better if you have a lot of data.
>
> The old cognos impromptu and powerplay were fairly good.
> You needed a fair bit of knowledge to set the reports up.
> Not looked at recent versions.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Andy O'Neill
>
>