JMP® is statistical analysis software with capabilities that span from data access to advanced statistical techniques, with click of a button sharing. The software is interactive and visual, and statistically deep enough to allow users to see and explore data.
$1,320
per year per user
Jupyter Notebook
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Jupyter Notebook is an open-source web application that allows users to create and share documents containing live code, equations, visualizations and narrative text. Uses include: data cleaning and transformation, numerical simulation, statistical modeling, data visualization, and machine learning. It supports over 40 programming languages, and notebooks can be shared with others using email, Dropbox, GitHub and the Jupyter Notebook Viewer. It is used with JupyterLab, a web-based IDE for…
N/A
Posit
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
Posit, formerly RStudio, is a modular data science platform, combining open source and commercial products.
It is great because it has UI menus but it costs money whereas the other programs are free. That makes it ideal for beginners but I think that RStudio and Python are going to make someone a lot more marketable for future opportunities since most companies won't pay for the …
For me, JMP is the best and easy way to run regressions. I wouldn't use it for other more advanced models. I decided to use it because we got it for free since we are technically an academic institution.
Jupyter Notebook is very attractive platform for new developers to code and to learn programming and perform tasks as compared to other IDE. It has very well and easy visualization, interactive programming and sharing the live code and slideshow is very easy as compare to …
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Jupyter Notebook
Jupyter Notebook has a nicer interface than RStudio in our opinion and since most of our group is familiar with Jupyter Notebook it has made it a default choice. Overall the interactive programming as well as the easy visualizations, model deployment, and markdown made Jupyter …
Jupyter Notebook is the core feature extended on by many commercial alternatives. The commercial alternatives have more feature integration with the rest of their portfolio. RStudio is another competitor for interactive and literate programming.
With Jupyter Notebook besides doing data analysis and performing complex visualizations you can also write machine learning algorithms with a long list of libraries that it supports. You can make better predictions, observations etc. with it which can help you achieve better …
I like Jupyter Notebook over the other two because it keeps my work more organized. It helps me to structure my workflow and the ability to run commands in chunks keeps me from being confused when coming back to the work after some time.
RStudio's user interface is easier to use than Jupyter Notebook (particularly for users that are new to programming). Many of our users have experience with RStudio Desktop, so switching to RStudio Server Pro was very easy. Deploying applications is also much easier thanks to …
I used them to run Python codes, so that not really comparable here. I will describe my experience around it. I feel that Jupyter Notebook is the closest product to RMarkdown file, as it allows users to run line by line and share outcomes underneath. PyCharm and Visual Studio …
Python IDEs like Spyder or Jupyter Notebooks are not steady and stable as compared to RStudio. The newer version of Python or Installing new Library corrupted the Spyder or Jupyter Notebook versions, not same with RStudio! There are not easily available tools like RShiny in order …
We feel that RStudio Teams is so far one of the best prototyping environments for data scientists. It is much more robust than standard JupyterLab/Jupyter Notebook instances in the cloud and it supports better authentication methods, allows to share your content via RStudio …
Jupyter Notebook is a similar tool, which is also good. RStudio has better support on R, and it's easier to generate and share analysis reports through the RStudio connect.
RStudio stacks up pretty well against Anaconda. However, Anaconda might be the first choice for someone who likes Python for their analytics and machine learning needs. In the past, I have found it seamless to connect Jupyter Notebook (in Anaconda suite) to integrate with other …
RStudio works really well compared to competitors such as Jupyter Notebook where there is no environment to visualize variables. RStudio on the other hand is much easier to use and provides the right set of environments for users.
Posit is far better than Jupyter Notebook and Minitab in this regard that Posit is actually capable of doing all kind of analytical stuffs like data pre-processing, wrangling, validation and visualization. On the other hand, Jupyter Notebook can be used for python programming …
inter-departmental collaboration - my first choice would be TIBCO Spotfire natural language processing and knowledge graphs - my first choice would be Python information security & visualizations (including d3.js libraries) - my first choice is RStudio
RStudio stacks up pretty well against its competition. For me, it is really up to personal preference and what you are used to when deciding between the competitions. I like that Python packages have the most external resources, so it's easier to troubleshoot. But RStudio does …
RStudio is free and so that is the main reason that I use it. I like that it is open source and so there are lots of support on the internet. I tried SAS JMP and Python in a text editor but RStudio was better than either of those options for cost and code flexibility …
JMP is more customizable. It also has very good drag and drop graphing capabilities, which are not present in RStudio. Data exploration is much more convenient with JMP. However, the analysis work is better with RStudio since it is a bit hard to tweak the JMP built-in models.
I have tried to work a bit with Jupyer notebooks and Spyder, but both are way less agreeable than RStudio. Once you taste RStudio, you can't go back!
Verified User
Professional
Chose Posit
These all work synergistically and fulfill slightly different roles. In general this is determined by complexity of task and the degree of training and expertise of the end user. RStudio works well for organisations looking to move into doing more complex analytics. In general …
Most bioinformaticians and scientists prefer coding in R, however python is the widely used language also. I have seen that Rstudio has definitely improved and the addition of python capability has made it easier for both python and R programmers. The built in terminal has also …
I've been pitched a few different data science notebook tools that tend to be more expensive and less suited to R development. I don't think I've actually seen another product that really compares to RStudio Connect for publishing Shiny Apps. I think the alternative there is …
Rodeo, jupyter and other editors RStudio like for both R and Python are simply not at the level of RStudio and they do not provide the same range of features that comes with it.
Far better integrated and easy to use. The only full-blown Python IDE is PyCharm, and it is a monolith. I used Spyder instead. I was very happy when RStudio added Python support so I can ditch Jupyter Notebooks, which really isn't an IDE but is more like RMarkdown, a small …
While many of these are great, RStudio is the best for R work. There is also native support in the IDE for combining other languages, like Python, into workflows easily so work across languages can be handled in one location.
Because RStudio is more specifically focused on facilitating programming in R, whereas these other IDEs focus either on more general programming frameworks or a different language, it is the best choice for most of our analysis. Computational biology relies heavily on the …
It is perfectly suited for statistical analyses, but I would not recommend JMP for users who do not have a statistical background. As previously stated, the learning curve is exceptionally steep, and I think that it would prove to be too steep for those without statistical background/knowledge
I've created a number of daisy chain notebooks for different workflows, and every time, I create my workflows with other users in mind. Jupiter Notebook makes it very easy for me to outline my thought process in as granular a way as I want without using innumerable small. inline comments.
In my humble opinion, if you are working on something related to Statistics, RStudio is your go-to tool. But if you are looking for something in Machine Learning, look out for Python. The beauty is that there are packages now by which you can write Python/SQL in R. Cross-platform functionality like such makes RStudio way ahead of its competition. A couple of chinks in RStudio armor are very small and can be considered as nagging just for the sake of argument. Other than completely based on programming language, I couldn't find significant drawbacks to using RStudio. It is one of the best free software available in the market at present.
JMP is designed from the ground-up to be a tool for analysts who do not have PhDs in Statistics without in anyway "dumbing down" the level of statistical analysis applied. In fact, JMP operationalizes the most advanced statistical methods. JMP's design is centred on the JMP data table and dialog boxes. It is data focused not jargon-focussed. So, unlike other software where you must choose the correct statistical method (eg. contingency, ANOVA, linear regression, etc.), with JMP you simply assign the columns in a dialog into roles in the analysis and it chooses the correct statistical method. It's a small thing but it reflects the thinking of the developers: analysts know their data and should only have to think about their data. Analyses should flow from there.
JMP makes most things interactive and visual. This makes analyses dynamic and engaging and obviates the complete dependence on understanding p-values and other statistical concepts(though they are all there) that are often found to be foreign or intimidating.
One of the best examples of this is JMP's profiler. Rather than looking at static figures in a spreadsheet, or a series of formulas, JMP profiles the formulas interactively. You can monitor the effect of changing factors (Xs) and see how they interact with other factors and the responses. You can also specify desirability (maximize, maximize, match-target) and their relative importances to find factor settings that are optimal. I have spent many lengthy meetings working with the profiler to review design and process options with never a dull moment.
The design of experiments (DOE) platform is simply outstanding and, in fact, the principal developers of it have won several awards. Over the last 15 years, using methods broadly known as an "exchange algorithm," JMP can create designs that are far more flexible than conventional designs. This means, for example, that you can create a design with just the interactions that are of interest; you can selectively choose those interactions that are not of interest and drop collecting their associated combinations.
Classical designs are rigid. For example, a Box-Benhken or other response surface design can have only continuous factors. What if you want to investigate these continuous factors along with other categorical factors such as different categorical variables such as materials or different furnace designs and look at the interaction among all factors? This common scenario cannot be handled with conventional designs but are easily accommodated with JMP's Custom DOE platform.
The whole point of DOE is to be able to look at multiple effects comprehensively but determine each one's influence in near or complete isolation. The custom design platform, because it produces uniques designs, provides the means to evaluate just how isolated the effects are. This can be done before collecting data because this important property of the DOE is a function of the design, not the data. By evaluating these graphical reports of the quality of the design, the analyst can make adjustments, adding or reducing runs, to optimize cost, effort and expected learnings.
Over the last number of releases of JMP, which appear about every 18 months now, they have skipped the dialog boxes to direct, drag-and-drop analyses for building graphs and tables as well as Statistical Process Control Charts. Interactivity such as this allows analysts to "be in the moment." As with all aspects of JMP, they are thinking of their subject matter without the cumbersomeness associated with having to think about statistical methods. It's rather like a CEO thinking about growing the business without having to think about every nuance and intricacy of accounting. The statistical thinking is burned into the design of JMP.
Without data analysis is not possible. Getting data into a situation where it can be analyzed can be a major hassle. JMP can pull data from a variety of sources including Excel spreadsheets, CSV, direct data feeds and databases via ODBC. Once the data is in JMP it has all the expected data manipulation capabilities to form it for analysis.
Back in 2000 JMP added a scripting language (JMP Scripting Language or JSL for short) to JMP. With JSL you can automate routine analyses without any coding, you can add specific analyses that JMP does not do out of the box and you can create entire analytical systems and workflows. We have done all three. For example, one consumer products company we are working with now has a need for a variant of a popular non-parametric analysis that they have employed for years. This method will be found in one of the menus and appear as if it were part of JMP to begin with. As for large systems, we have written some that are tens of thousands of lines that take the form of virtual labs and process control systems among others.
JSL applications can be bundled and distributed as JMP Add-ins which make it really easy for users to add to their JMP installation. All they need to do is double-click on the add-in file and it's installed. Pharmaceutical companies and others who are regulated or simply want to control the JMP environment can lock-down JMP's installation and prevent users from adding or changing functionality. Here, add-ins can be distributed from a central location that is authorized and protected to users world-wide.
JMP's technical support is second to none. They take questions by phone and email. I usually send email knowing that I'll get an informed response within 24 hours and if they cannot resolve a problem they proactively keep you informed about what is being done to resolve the issue or answer your question.
The support is incredibly professional and helpful, and they often go out of their way to help me when something doesn't work.
The one-click publishing from RStudio Connect is absolutely amazing, and I really like the way that it deploys your exact package versions, because otherwise, you can get in a terrible mess.
Python doesn't feel quite as native as R at the moment but I have definitely deployed stuff in R and Python that works beautifully which is really nice indeed.
In general JMP is much better fit for a general "data mining" type application. If you want a specific statistics based toolbox, (meaning you just want to run some predetermined test, like testing for a different proportion) then JMP works, but is not the best. JMP is much more suited to taking a data set and starting from "square 1" and exploring it through a range of analytics.
The CPK (process capability) module output is shockingly poor in JMP. This sticks out because, while as a rule everything in JMP is very visual and presentable, the CPK graph is a single-line-on-grey-background drawing. It is not intuitive, and really doesn't tell the story. (This is in contrast with a capability graph in Minitab, which is intuitive and tells a story right off.) This is also the case with the "guage study" output, used for mulivary analysis in a Six Sigma project. It is not intuitive and you need to do a lot of tweaking to make the graph tell you the story right off. I have given this feedback to JMP, and it is possible that it will be addressed in future versions.
I've never heard of JMP allowing floating licenses in a company. This will ALWAYS be a huge sticking point for small to middle size companies, that don't have teams people dedicated to analytics all day. If every person that would do problem solving needs his/her own seat, the cost can be prohibitive. (It gets cheaper by the seat as you add licenses, but for a small company that might get no more than 5 users, it is still a hard sell.)
Need more Hotkeys for creating a beautiful notebook. Sometimes we need to download other plugins which messes [with] its default settings.
Not as powerful as IDE, which sometimes makes [the] job difficult and allows duplicate code as it get confusing when the number of lines increases. Need a feature where [an] error comes if duplicate code is found or [if a] developer tries the same function name.
Python integration is newer and still can be rough, especially with when using virtual environments.
RStudio Connect pricing feels very department focused, not quite an enterprise perspective.
Some of the RStudio packages don't follow conventional development guidelines (API breaking changes with minor version numbers) which can make supporting larger projects over longer timeframes difficult.
JMP has been good at releasing updates and adding new features and their support is good. Analytics is quick and you don't need scripting/programming experience. It has been used organization wide, and works well in that respect. Open source means that there are concerns regarding timely support. Cheap licensing and easy to maintain.
There is no viable alternative right now. The toolset is good and the functionality is increasing with every release. It is backed by regular releases and ongoing development by the RStudio team. There is good engagement with RStudio directly when support is required. Also there's a strong and growing community of developers who provide additional support and sample code.
The GUI interface makes it easier to generate plots and find statistics without having to write code. The JSL scripting is a bit of a steep learning curve but does give you more ability to customize your analysis. Overall, I would recommend JMP as a good product for overall usability.
Jupyter is highly simplistic. It took me about 5 mins to install and create my first "hello world" without having to look for help. The UI has minimalist options and is quite intuitive for anyone to become a pro in no time. The lightweight nature makes it even more likeable.
For someone who learns how to use the software and picks up on the "language" of R, it's very easy to use. For beginners, it can be hard and might require a course, as well as the appropriate statistical training to understand what packages to use and when
RStudio is very available and cheap to use. It needs to be updated every once in a while, but the updates tend to be quick and they do not hinder my ability to make progress. I have not experienced any RStudio outages, and I have used the application quite a bit for a variety of statistical analyses
Support is great and give ease of contact, rapid response, and willingness to 'stick to the task' until resolution or acknowledgement that the problem would have to be resolved in a future build. Basically, one gets the very real sense that another human being is sensitive to your problems - great or small.
Since R is trendy among statisticians, you can find lots of help from the data science/ stats communities. If you need help with anything related to RStudio or R, google it or search on StackOverflow, you might easily find the solution that you are looking for.
MS Excel with AnalysisToolPak provides a home-grown solution, but requires a high degree of upkeep and is difficult to hand off. Minitab is the closes competitor, but JMP is better suited to the production environment, roughly equivalent in price, and has superior support.
With Jupyter Notebook besides doing data analysis and performing complex visualizations you can also write machine learning algorithms with a long list of libraries that it supports. You can make better predictions, observations etc. with it which can help you achieve better business decisions and save cost to the company. It stacks up better as we know Python is more widely used than R in the industry and can be learnt easily. Unlike PyCharm jupyter notebooks can be used to make documentations and exported in a variety of formats.
RStudio was provided as the most customizable. It was also strictly the most feature-rich as far as enabling our organization to script, run, and make use of R open-source packages in our data analysis workstreams. It also provided some support for python, which was useful when we had R heavy code with some python threaded in. Overall we picked Rstudio for the features it provided for our data analysis needs and the ability to interface with our existing resources.
RStudio is very scalable as a product. The issue I have is that it doesn't necessarily fit in nicely with the mainly Microsoft environment that everybody else is using. Having RStudio for us means dedicated servers and recruiting staff who know how to manage the environment. This isn't a fault of the product at all, it's just part of the data science landscape that we all have to put up with. Having said that RStudio is absolutely great for running on low spec servers and there are loads of options to handle concurrency, memory use, etc.
ROI: Even if the cost can be high, the insights you get out of the tool would definitely be much more valuable than the actual cost of the software. In my case, most of the results of your analysis were shown to the client, who was blown away, making the money spent well worth for us.
Potential negative: If you are not sure your team will use it, there's a chance you will just waste money. Sometimes the IT department (usually) tries to deploy a better tool for the entire organization but they keep using the old tool they are used too (most likely MS Excel).
Using it for data science in a very big and old company, the most positive impact, from my point of view, has been the ability of spreading data culture across the group. Shortening the path from data to value.
Still it's hard to quantify economic benefits, we are struggling and it's a great point of attention, since splitting out the contribution of the single aspects of a project (and getting the RStudio pie) is complicated.
What is sure is that, in the long run, RStudio is boosting productivity and making the process in which is embedded more efficient (cost reduction).
