Re: st: comparing capabilities of Econometric softwares

[David Jacobs <jacobs.184@sociology.osu.edu>]

I use both Stata and Eviews, but I haven't used Shazam.  Eviews is much 
better at time-series and other techniques that I guess are used by 
macroeconomists but I strongly prefer Stata for both pooled cross-section 
time-series and cross-sectional analyses.  And there's no survival analysis 
in Eviews.  Eviews is far more automated than Stata and it is much easier 
to get TIMELY graphics out of Eviews.  If you want to save money, you might 
find that Eviews 3.1 is sufficient for your needs as the added features in 
version 4.1 would be useful only for advanced macro extimation (I think 
they still sell version 3.1).  And the graphics in 3.1 is more intuitive.

In general Stata makes you learn commands;  Eviews is automated and it's 
interface and push button controls are more intuitive and faster to 
learn.  In short, I find both programs to be extremely useful, but I use 
Stata more often because it is more flexible despite it's less than user 
friendly approach.

Dave Jacobs

At 12:22 PM 12/17/2003 -0400, you wrote:

> Greetings to everyone,
>
>  Notwithstanding bouts of frustration by Stata, I am an devoted user of the
> software. However, just out of curiosity what are the strenths and weaknesses
> of Stata in comparison to softwares such as Shazam and Eviews? If anyone has
> ever used either Shazam and Eviews please offer your comments about their
> capabilities as well.
>  Thank you,
>
> Kimberley
>
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> *   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/