SNDT - Sand Technology - A diamond in the sand Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : SNDT - Sand Technology - A diamond in the sand

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: jack crane who wrote (853)	9/23/1998 11:32:00 AM
From: let	of 1200

Top 100 list...Sand is listed as Hitachi here,: he WINNERS 1. IBM 2. SAS 3. Oracle 4. Platinum 5. NCR 6. Cognos 7. Compaq/Digital/Tandem 8. Prism 9. Sybase 10. Business Objects 11. Seagate Software 12. Microsoft 13. Hewlett-Packard 14. Informatica 15. MicroStrategy 16. Brio Technology 17. Sun Microsystems 18. Hyperion/Arbor 19. BMC 20. Information Advantage / IQ Software 21. Red Brick 22. Visio 23. Silicon Graphics 24. Comshare 25. SyncSort 26. EMC 27. Information Builders 28. SPSS 29. Ardent 30. INTERSOLV 31. Sagent Technology 32. WhiteLight Systems 33. Seagate Technology 34. Computer Associates 35. Hummingbird (Andyne) 36. dbINTELLECT 37. Lotus 38. DataMind 39. Amdahl 40. Wall Data 41. i.d.Centric (A Firstlogic Technology) 42. Hitachi Data Systems 43. Data General/CLARiiON 44. Exabyte 45. INTEL 46. Vality 47. ETI 48. Integral Solutions 49. Pilot Software 50. Dell 51. Trillium Software 52. Angoss 53. Carleton 54. Informix 55. Cayenne 56. Gladstone 57. MapInfo 58. DBE Software 59. ESRI 60. Popkin Software 61. Vento Software 62. Innovative Systems 63. SILVERRUN Technologies 64. Data Mirror 65. Pitney Bowes Software Systems 66. Visible Decisions 67. Information Discovery 68. Sterling Software 69. Actuate Software 70. Advanced Visual Systems 71. Symbios Logic (Adaptec) 72. WizSoft 73. Embarcadero 74. Broadbase 75. Datasage, Inc. 76. Excalibur 77. Unisys 78. Pervasive 79. Group 1 Software 80. Lucent 81. SELECT Software 82. Prime Response 83. Legato 84. QueryObject Systems 85. Strategic Reporting Systems 86. Sequent Computer Systems 87. Torrent 88. Knowledge Discovery 1. 89. Speedware 90. Unitech 91. CASEwise Systems 92. Boole & Babbage 93. Fiserv 94. Visible Systems 95. HOPS International 96. DynaMark 97. Siemens/Pyramid 98. Qualitative Marketing Software 99. Anubis 100. Network Appliance (Back to the Top) Data Warehouse 100 Methodology The DM Review magazine Data Warehouse 100 was determined based on the results of a product usage and vendor rating survey conducted over the Web among readers by Market Perspectives Inc. Survey respondents were presented an extensive list of 443 products in 13 different data warehousing product categories. The survey was conducted over the Internet from April through July, 1998 and resulting in 624 completed questionnaires. The top 100 vendors were chosen based on a two stage weighting process that made calculated adjustments for the following factors: (a) the rating scores for each product, (b) the number of sites reporting use of the product and (c) the number of products in a given product category and (d) the number of categories in which a vendor participated. Detailed Description: 624 DM Review Readers participated in a 1998 readership study that included a 13-category vendor selection and rating section. Readers were invited via an insert in the magazine and a banner on the dmreview.com Web site. Participants were presented with 443 products distributed among 13 categories in the survey instrument and asked which products were used in their organization. (NOTE: a vendor could appear in more than one category if they had a product offering.) Only vendors whose products were in use were included in the Data Warehouse 100 calculations. The participant was then asked to rate each selected vendor on a 5-point scale ranging from excellent to poor where 5 meant excellent and 1 meant poor. The average rating scores were then weighted to reflect the scope-of-use for each product, by multiplying the average rating score by the percent of sites reporting use of the product yielding an index value for each product. Products were then sorted in their respective category in descending order based on the index value and the top 17 in each category were assigned a value of 1 to 17 with the top entry receiving a value of 17. Given the varying number of vendors in each category, a category weighting was determined by dividing 17 into the number of products in each category. The category ranking for each product was then multiplied by its category weight to arrive at a final weighted index score for each product. All products were then sorted in descending order based on their weighted index score. The first 100 companies in the resulting ordered list determined which vendors were included and their relative positioning in the Data Warehouse 100 list. Back to: DM Review magazine Data-Warehouse.com

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next