Skip to content

how do i persuade IT to install R on PCs ?? ...and should I ??

10 messages · frenchcr, Ben Bolker, Richard M. Heiberger +4 more

frenchcr
# 
Please help me persuade IT to install R on my computer!

All suggestions welcome.

Our IT department run scared when you mention software that they have no
working experience of.

I need to know the pros and cons of having R on corporate desktops.

Please no funny stuff, this is quite a serious issue for us.

Pros and cons would be good.

Thanks.
Marc Schwartz
#
On Nov 22, 2009, at 5:14 AM, frenchcr wrote:

            

      
      
      
    

        
You need to define how R will meet and preferably enhance whatever  
functional requirements you have as compared to alternatives that are  
either already installed or that your IT folks are considering. How  
will R enhance your ability to meet the needs of the internal and/or  
external consumers of your analytic services?

Typically, arguments based solely on costs (eg. R is free) will fall  
on deaf ears in IT, since there is the likelihood that your R  
installations will require some level of support from them, thus  
having a real cost in time and money. Are your R installations going  
to need to interface with other platforms such as database servers,  
etc? What security and server/network access implications will it  
have? What other supporting applications will you require to use with  
R (eg. editors, Perl, LaTeX, C/FORTAN compilers and related tools,  
etc.) that will increase support and maintenance requirements?

Who is going to support R as problems occur and updates are needed?  
Most IT departments are used to paying for support to a commercial  
vendor. Somebody that they can call when things go wrong. They may not  
be used to getting support from mailing lists. Yes, there are  
commercial variants of R that address that issue and that may be  
something to consider depending upon the specifics of your situation.

What knowledge does your IT department have of open source development  
and support? Is Linux being used on servers or workstations? Even if  
they are using a commercial Linux installation (eg. Red Hat), they may  
be more comfortable with the general concept of open source, which may  
be part of the battle that you are facing.

Is there an alternative to installing on local desktops versus  
considering a central installation on a server? The former magnifies  
the time and workload requirements to IT for installing and  
maintaining over a larger number of computers. The latter enables a  
more centralized and possibly more efficient IT approach to this.

What, if any, issues are there in converting existing code and  
processes that are implemented using other applications to R? What if  
any code reviews and functional validations will be required,  
resulting in real costs associated with those processes?

There are not only direct costs, but indirect costs and opportunity  
costs associated with moving to and using R. You are going to require  
some level of support from them for R, which means they will have less  
time and resources for other activities.

This becomes a control, political, economic and potentially even a  
legal issue. Over the years, as desktop PC's became common, there was  
a decentralization and dilution of IT involvement from the old  
mainframe/minicomputer days. That trend has been reversing for some  
time in most corporate environments, such that IT is taking a much  
more proactive role in controlling technology decision making, support  
and access across the IT spectrum. That includes driving corporate  
policies regarding applications, hardware, security, mobile platforms  
(laptops, smart phones, etc.) and is influenced by a variety of  
factors, not the least of which can be risk management, regulatory and  
related issues.

An incremental approach is something to consider. Install R on one  
desktop machine or a server and let your IT folks become comfortable  
with it, before moving to a larger scale implementation if you are  
looking beyond just your one desktop.

In addition, sell your manager(s) on R to gain their support and  
influence on the decision making process, therefore helping to  
politically bolster your arguments. It is known as "managing up" and  
can be an important part of the strategy in gaining IT's support,  
presuming that your managers are in a position of influence with IT.

It would be difficult to provide detailed guidance to you without more  
information on your specific environment, but hopefully the above  
provides food for thought, at least in the abstract.

Cheers,

Marc Schwartz

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Ben Bolker
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
frenchcr <frenchcr <at> btinternet.com> writes:

            

      
      
      
    

        
You can probably expect to get some "funny stuff" along with
any useful advice you do get.

  It is almost impossible to answer this question without
knowing what you want to use R for!

  You could tell your IT department that R is easy to install
and well-behaved (i.e. it is self-contained and doesn't do
nasty things to system libraries etc.), that it doesn't "phone
home" or need to talk to servers outside your environment
(unless you program it to, or unless you try to download &
install additional packages), that it is used by a very wide
range of reputable companies (see a variety of discussions on
this list, or see http://www.r-project.org/foundation/memberlist.html ),
... but the most important thing should presumably be whether
it helps you do your job ...  The license is unrestrictive,
unless you want to redistribute a modified version, in which
case it requires you to provide source code and allow 
redistribution ...

  Cons: like any software, it takes time and space to
install (although not very much).  R develops rapidly
and there is little support for "obsolete" versions. 
The software comes without support, but you can pay for 
third-party support.

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        
      

    

    

      
      

        
      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      David Winsemius
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On Nov 22, 2009, at 4:45 PM, stephen's mailinglist account wrote:

        

            

      
      
      
    

        

      
      
    

            

      
      
      
    

        
I'm not surprised to see McCollough and Heiser's names on such an  
article. They have both a long track record of pointing out Excel's  
statistical deficiencies. (I don't they did so together in the past.)   
MS has turned a deaf ear to their efforts to point the way to correct  
methods. It is truly amazing that MS continues to ignore constrictive  
criticism and that such arrogance is compounded by corporate policies  
encouraging reliance on demonstrably faulty tools. The full list of  
articles documenting MS's resistance to statistical corrections would  
be much longer that just this one article and extends back more than a  
decade.

            

      
      
      
    

        

  
    

      
      
    

  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        
      

    

    

      
      

        
      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Barry Rowlingson
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 1:01 PM, David Winsemius <dwinsemius at comcast.net> wrote:

        

            

      
      
      
    

        
Well, the OO.org guys are trying to make something compatible with a
piece of MS software, but maybe this is taking it too far.

 I love the story that sections of Microsoft XML spec for Office says
things like "Do whatever Excel does", thus setting into stone the bugs
inherent in that package as an ISO standard...

Barry

  
  


  


      

    

    

      
      

        


  

        

      Marc Schwartz
    

    

      
      #
    

  


  

      
On Nov 23, 2009, at 7:24 AM, Barry Rowlingson wrote:

        

            

      
      
      
    

        
Just to reinforce Baz' statement about OO.org, for those who have been  
around here for a while, you may recall this discussion back in 2003:

https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2003-June/034565.html

https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2003-June/034860.html


Nothing has changed since then in OO.org's Calc version 3.1.1, which  
is the current release.


On OSX, I can add Numbers from Apple's iWork '09 the mix:

Formula: =4.145 * 100 + 0.5
Result:  415.000000000000000000000000000000

Formula: =0.5 - 0.4 - 0.1
Result:  -0.000000000000000027755575615629

Formula: =(0.5 - 0.4 - 0.1)
Result: -0.000000000000000027755575615629


So FWIW, Apple has not made the same errors as MS and OO.org, at least  
in this narrow example.

Also, here are two additional Excel resources:

David Heiser's page: http://www.daheiser.info/excel/frontpage.html

Patrick Burns' Spreadsheet Addition: http://www.burns-stat.com/pages/Tutor/spreadsheet_addiction.html


HTH,

Marc Schwartz