H2O.ai vs. IBM SPSS Modeler

Most suited if in little time you wanted to build and train a model. Then, H2O makes life very simple. It has support with R, Python and Java, so no programming dependency is required to use it. It's very simple to use. If you want to modify or tweak your ML algorithm then H2O is not suitable. You can't develop a model from scratch.

Incentivized

Fast NLP analytics are very easy in SPSS Modeler because there is a built-in interface for classifying concepts and themes and several pre-built models to match the incoming text source. The visualizations all match and help present NLP information without substantial coding, typically required for word clouds and such. SPSS Modeler is good at attaining results faster in general, and the visual nature of the code makes a good tool to have in the data science team's repository. For younger data scientists, and those just interested, it is a good tool to allow for exploring data science techniques.

Incentivized

• Excellent analytical and prediction tool
• In the beginning, usage of H20 Flow in Web UI enables quick development and sharing of the analytical model
• Readily available algorithms, easy to use in your analytical projects
• Faster than Python scikit learn (in machine learning supervised learning area)
• It can be accessed (run) from Python, not only JAVA etc.
• Well documented and suitable for fast training or self studying
• In the beginning, one can use the clickable Flow interface (WEB UI) and later move to a Python console. There is then no need to click in H20 Flow
• It can be used as open source

Incentivized

• Combine text and data
• Provide facilities for all phases of the data mining process.
• Use a node and stream paradigm to easily and quickly create models.

Incentivized

• Better documentation
• Improve the Visual presentations including charting etc

Incentivized

• Has very old style graphs, with lots of limitations.
• Some advanced statistical functions cannot be done through the menu.
• The data connectivity is not that extensive.
• It's an expensive tool.

Incentivized

It is fairly user friendly, with limited practice. Similar to many statistical programs it requires a little time to get comfortable with, but once you use if for a project, the second time around is much easier.

Incentivized

The overall experience I have with H2O is really awesome, even with its cost effectiveness.

Incentivized

The online support board is helpful and the free add ons are incredibly appreciated.

Incentivized

Both are open source (though H2O only up to some level). Both comprise of deep learning, but H2O is not focused directly on deep learning, while Tensor Flow has a "laser" focus on deep learning. H2O is also more focused on scalability. H2O should be looked at not as a competitor but rather a complementary tool. The use case is usually not only about the algorithms, but also about the data model and data logistics and accessibility. H2O is more accessible due to its UI. Also, both can be accessed from Python. The community around TensorFlow seems larger than that of H2O.

Incentivized

When it comes to investigation and descriptive we have found SPSS Statistics to be the tool of choice, but when it comes to projects with large and several datasets SPSS Modeler has been picked from our customers.

Incentivized

• Positive impact: saving in infrastructure expenses - compared to other bulky tools this costs a fraction
• Positive impact: ability to get quick fixes from H2O when problems arise - compared to waiting for several months/years for new releases from other vendors
• Positive impact: Access to H2O core team and able to get features that are needed for our business quickly added to the core H2O product

Incentivized

• Positive - Ease of decision making and reduction in product life cycle time.
• Positive - Gives entirely new perspective with the help of right team. Helps expanding the portfolio.
• Negative - Needs to have good understanding about mathematical modelling, of which talent is rare and expensive. Hence, increase the costs for R&D and manpower.

Incentivized