
I should have also noted that Sweave is available for use with R.  This is
offset, however, by the fact that I will probably never be able to convince
anyone to use Latex.  This is a pity as I often find myself admiring
reports done in Latex as opposed to the ones I have worked on in MS Word.

Cody Hamilton, PhD
Edwards Lifesciences

As always, I am speaking for myself and not necessarily for Edwards
Lifesciences.

Cody_Hamilton@Edwards.com wrote:
> Following up to some extent on Friday's discussion regarding the
> 'validation' of R, could I ask the list group's opinion on possible
> advantages of R over Splus from a pharma/devices perspective?  I wish to
> exclude the obvious price difference, which doesnâ€™t seem to carry as
much
> weight as I would have thought.  Besides, I have noticed many former
Splus
> users gravitating towards R, and I suspect that the reasons are not
purely
> economic.
>
> I can think of a few advantages of Splus:
> 1. SeqTrial (of course that means more $)
> 2. Tech support
> 3. The warm fuzzies that management seems to get from proprietary
software
>
> I can also think of a few advantages of R:
> 1. Based on my personal experiences, simulations requiring a lot of
looping
> seem to run faster.
> 2. R interfaces with BUGS, for example through BRUGS.
> 3. The wonderful help list!
>
> As always, I am speaking for myself and not necessarily for Edwards
> Lifesciences.
>
> Regards,
>    -Cody
>
> Cody Hamilton, PhD
> Edwards Lifesciences
>            [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

