4 ms·

I would stress that with Excel, changing the underlying data set, especially dimensions of your data is annoying and not very automate-able. This is the case e

I would stress that with Excel, changing the underlying data set, especially dimensions of your data is annoying and not very automate-able. This is the case even when the analysis is the exact same or very similar as the original. You either need to copy formulas over for every data set/sheet or write VBA code to automate this, which still isn't as flexible as in R. Excel is better if you want to pore over the data: study a piece, scroll down, study some more. R is better if you can easily pinpoint the areas you think are interesting and index directly into the array. Excel has indexing capabilities (F5 which goes to an address), but not by row/column names. Additionally, you can't do multi-step analysis that involves segmentation/sub-setting of the data very easily with Excel. This is related to the first point about changing an underlying data set or its dimensions. There are ways around this, but they are VERY annoying. I use R for the majority of my analysis. I used to be a Matlab user but needed to find a cheaper tool when I left my job. I still use excel for simple data inspection and when I need to send my analysis to other people to peruse.

3pt14159 17y ago
"I would stress that with Excel, changing the underlying data set, especially dimensions of your data is annoying and not very automate-able. This is the case even when the analysis is the exact same or very similar as the original. You either need to copy formulas over for every data set/sheet or write VBA code to automate this, which still isn't as flexible as in R." In certain circumstances you are right. Wanting to use the same spreadsheet for a very, very similar task is often annoying. This can be avoided if you knew from the start that you wanted to make something more reusable, but sadly that isn't always the case. Of course there are ways of automating them (VBA as you mentioned, or DB connections when appropriate, sometimes UDF, or just organizing the data in the correct way) but this is definitely one of my major annoyances. "Excel has indexing capabilities (F5 which goes to an address), but not by row/column names." Actually with the name manager you can do this. Simply name the row(s) and column(s) you want to index by, press F5, and type "my_col,my_row" and you are there. It even does the "and" selection for you, which you can easily exit out of if you want. Not sure if it is in versions prior to Excel 2010, but I don't really find myself using this all that much. "Additionally, you can't do multi-step analysis that involves segmentation/sub-setting of the data very easily with Excel. This is related to the first point about changing an underlying data set or its dimensions. There are ways around this, but they are VERY annoying." Your first statement is only correct if you mean "you can't do some multi-step analyzes" because some of them are just plain simple. Also, I don't find the occasional annoyances (which typically have to do with using match(), vlookup(), cross_product(), or similar functions) anywhere nearly as annoying as some of the other things I have to deal with when programming. Dates can be a pain in the ass. Even in Ruby. I'll be clear in saying I have no idea about what R can do. I've only toyed with it due to lack of time, but I do know that Excel can do a bunch of really cool things. Solver, remote UDFs written in any programming language (including Ruby running on a linux box), forms for pointy haired bosses, pretty awesome charts if you know what you are doing, cubes, goal seek, data tables, macros, formula auditing, db connections, etc. What I don't like is the general vibe that Excel is, and only is, for MBAs and R is, and only is, for comp sci kids. That just isn't true, and I don't have to know anything about R to make that claim because I know some comp sci kids some of the time get a ton of value out of Excel. Right tool, right job.

3pt14159 17y ago

"I would stress that with Excel, changing the underlying data set, especially dimensions of your data is annoying and not very automate-able. This is the case even when the analysis is the exact same or very similar as the original. You either need to copy formulas over for every data set/sheet or write VBA code to automate this, which still isn't as flexible as in R." In certain circumstances you are right. Wanting to use the same spreadsheet for a very, very similar task is often annoying. This can be avoided if you knew from the start that you wanted to make something more reusable, but sadly that isn't always the case. Of course there are ways of automating them (VBA as you mentioned, or DB connections when appropriate, sometimes UDF, or just organizing the data in the correct way) but this is definitely one of my major annoyances. "Excel has indexing capabilities (F5 which goes to an address), but not by row/column names." Actually with the name manager you can do this. Simply name the row(s) and column(s) you want to index by, press F5, and type "my_col,my_row" and you are there. It even does the "and" selection for you, which you can easily exit out of if you want. Not sure if it is in versions prior to Excel 2010, but I don't really find myself using this all that much. "Additionally, you can't do multi-step analysis that involves segmentation/sub-setting of the data very easily with Excel. This is related to the first point about changing an underlying data set or its dimensions. There are ways around this, but they are VERY annoying." Your first statement is only correct if you mean "you can't do some multi-step analyzes" because some of them are just plain simple. Also, I don't find the occasional annoyances (which typically have to do with using match(), vlookup(), cross_product(), or similar functions) anywhere nearly as annoying as some of the other things I have to deal with when programming. Dates can be a pain in the ass. Even in Ruby. I'll be clear in saying I have no idea about what R can do. I've only toyed with it due to lack of time, but I do know that Excel can do a bunch of really cool things. Solver, remote UDFs written in any programming language (including Ruby running on a linux box), forms for pointy haired bosses, pretty awesome charts if you know what you are doing, cubes, goal seek, data tables, macros, formula auditing, db connections, etc. What I don't like is the general vibe that Excel is, and only is, for MBAs and R is, and only is, for comp sci kids. That just isn't true, and I don't have to know anything about R to make that claim because I know some comp sci kids some of the time get a ton of value out of Excel. Right tool, right job.