Dear Fredrike

I don´t use SAGA (I just run some tests with RSAGA), and my skill on
sp/maptools/spatstat/gstat/etc on R are low. I work with ArcGis and GRASS (i
started to use grass on 1995, after I needed to chance to other GIS and now
I also use - but not prefer - ArcGis).

I think that you can also include "Interactive raster data handling" and
"Vector data handling".

I don´t aggree with you that R have a + graphical layout.

I believe that SAGA have +/- or + Image Processing (you need to check it).

I think that R have a poor visualization when copared to GRASS and ArcGis (I
don´t have opinion about SAGA).

I think that SAGA have - command line when compared to others (you need to
deep so much to get the options of each modules; but others may have
different opinion).

How about database handling? Because may vector data may have tabular
attributes, and one may need to handle it to reach up desired results.

About help page, I suggest that SAGA is +/- because have several pdf
manuals/tutorial that help the beginers start and run many of tasks on few
hours/days.

I suggest you change de attribs of learning curve. R have a so hard learning
curve (-); ArcGis (almost for trivial tasks) have a + learning curve; GRASS
is +/- to me.

Costs is ok.

Despite ArcGis is a black box for geostats, some could suggest that it is
+/- instead of -.

I hope this help.

Best wishes,

miltinho astronauta
brazil


On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Oehler, Friderike (AGPP) <
Friderike.Oehler@fao.org> wrote:

> If a non-experienced person wanted to decide for one program in which to
> invest time and if one was to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of R,
> SAGA, GRASS and ArcGIS in comparison to each other in a simplistic way ...


>
>                        R       SAGA    GRASS   ArcGIS
> geostatistical analysis +       +/-     -       -
> spatial time-series analysis    +/-     -       -       ?
> raster data calculation +       +       +       +
> vector data calculation -       +/-     +       +
> image processing        -       -       +       +
> visualisation           +       +       +       +
> graphical layout                +       -       -       +
> GUI                     -       +       +/-     +
> command line            +       +/-     +       +/-
> automatisation          +       +/-     +       +/-
> interoperability                +       +/-     +       -
> file size limits                ?       ?       ?       ?
> help pages              +/-     -       +       -
> documentation           +       +       -       -
> learning curve          +/-     +       +/-     +/-     (from fast + to
> slow
> -)
> cost                    +       +       +       -       (from no cost + to
> expensive -)
> open-source             +       +       +       -
>
> would this look somehow realistic?
>
> I have more experience with GRASS and R than with SAGA or ArcGIS, so
> probably
> my view is biased or even incorrect. Could somebody else suggest a better
> judgement?
>
> Of course, I am aware that these programs -particularly R vs. GIS-  serve
> different purposes, but supposing that you don't know any of these and you
> wanted to have a starting point to select your tool for basic spatial data
> analysis and mapping, would this table help?
>
> Any comment/suggestion is most welcome,
> many thanks,
> Friderike
>
>
>
>
>        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-Geo mailing list
> R-sig-Geo@stat.math.ethz.ch
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]


