Alternatives to TM1

[cwilliamson]

Does anyone know of any good alternatives to TM1?

Preferably with an improved web interface (we have clients enter data through the website).

Palo looks promising but isn't stable/developed enough yet (for our purposes at least).

[rfielden]

Have you looked at qlikview ( http://www.qlikview.com/) or Board (http://www.board.com/IN/Home or http://www.neubrain.com/index.php)?

[robchr]

http://www.paristech.com

and
http://www.olap.com

In fact, this product has a very common origin with TM1 and uses a similar code base (aggregation and calculation engine). Very similar to TM1 but simpler user interface.

[Jeroen Eynikel]

I think it depends a lot on what it is you want to replace.

Clickview looks nice for instance, but unless I am mistaken it is a read only interface. So if you have data input it isn't an alternative.

I don't know Palo or any of the other very niche / open source products well but if it is for a serious project / large company I don't think any of these products is a realistic option.

If it is for a financial planning application SAP BPC (outlooksoft) is the competitor we come across the most, but I think TM1 is a far better product on the whole than SAP BPC.

For non financial applications like supply and demand planning (f.i) there is very little competition for TM1 in my opininion. I haven't encountered any BI software that can compete anyways.

As said: I think it depends primarily on your model & environment. If it needs a read/write environment, real-time calculations and is not ment for "the butcher shop" around the corner I can't really think of any alternatives, certainly not of any attractive ones.

If your main problem is with the web interface, you may want to look at using EV instead of TM1 web for instance.

[Alan Kirk]

I don't know Palo or any of the other very niche / open source products well but if it is for a serious project / large company I don't think any of these products is a realistic option.

Wow. It's been almost 11 hours since this has been posted and yet...

Either John hasn't had time to read his OLAP Forum e-mails today, or, as with Mt Vesuvius back in 79AD, the magma pressure is just building up beneath the surface ahead of the explosion.

[John Hobson]

Sorry Alan

I was away on a client's site implementing a Palo based solution with one of the UK's fastest growing major retailers, so I didn't have time to reply to the people who were saying it's not a realistic option

Of course Palo doesn't have the 20 year history that TM1 does, but I'm with Mr Pendse on this one - If you want nimble development and agile support you look to the smaller guys now. There is no necessary correlation between being small / open source / low price and not being appropriate for a serious project / large company. Look at how TM1 started.

But of course.... If you want to walk round with asbestos down the back of trousers and spend your life negotiating labyrinthine web sites then I can unreservedly recommend TM1 or whatever they are calling it this week

[Alan Kirk]

Sorry Alan

I was away on a client's site implementing a Palo based solution with one of the UK's fastest growing major retailers, so I didn't have time to reply to the people who were saying it's not a realistic option

Of course Palo doesn't have the 20 year history that TM1 does, but I'm with Mr Pendse on this one - If you want nimble development and agile support you look to the smaller guys now. There is no necessary correlation between being small / open source / low price and not being appropriate for a serious project / large company. Look at how TM1 started.

But of course.... If you want to walk round with asbestos down the back of trousers and spend your life negotiating labyrinthine web sites then I can unreservedly recommend TM1 or whatever they are calling it this week

Pah! Next you'll be telling me that Jedox actively encourages input from users about development of the product instead of requiring them to present business cases to salespeople to determine whether the request might possibly, perhaps, be considered for being put forward at some indeterminate point in the future!

Forsooth, where would society be without red tape and bureaucrats at ultra high prices, huh, answer me that?

Large, inflexible, unresponsive software companies know what users need far better than users do, as the intuitive, user-friendly design of their web sites so clearly demonstrates. We should respect their expertise in this area.

{Cut to a video clip of a guy in a blue suit and me belting out a rendition of "You're a Friend Of Mine" on the Harbourfront in Toronto...}

[cwilliamson]

Hi John,

Maybe you can answer some of the questions I have about Palo. We were looking to see if it would be feasible to move to it from TM1.

We have (what I think is) a non-traditional use for TM1. We use it for numerical (non-financial) data that is submitted through an online spreadsheet by our clients (40-50 users, with dimension level security).

Palo seems like it has a better web interface for our clients, but what is the status of the Worksheet Server? Last I looked, there was no manual for version 3 and it couldn't be used in Internet Explorer (most of our clients can't use other browsers).

Thanks for your help,
Charlotte

[John Hobson]

Hi Charlotte

I would think Palo would cope reasonably well with your model (although without seeing it I can't be sure). I can say that Palo can replicate the logic of a complex TM1 merchandise planning model pretty well. There are things I miss - (elisanc, TI - the Palo ETL is still a bit rudimentary) and things I appreciate having (undo spread, the neat rules wizard). Like Applix Jedox don't always get it right and there are things in the V3 release that they have had to sort out. Recent internal developments at Jedox mean that this is less likely to be an issue going forward. I am happily using V 2.5 on this project and, based on real world experience, I feel far more confident that my particular issues will be addressed by Jedox than I was when I had to report stuff via ICC to Applix. (Although I would express my admiration and gratitude towards the Jo Goble's, Mike Cs and Rebeccas of that old world)

Overall what I love about Palo is the freedom:

Licence issues? - None.
Cost so far to the client for software this project? - None.
Software issues? - some - it's software! .
Insurmountable software issues? - None.

Even if Jeroen is right and it transpires that Palo really is not the right choice for a serious project / large company then my client has still had a licence cost free prototype before they have to commit to a production build using say TM1 (in which case 99% of the prototype build is reusable). If he's wrong then they will save a shed load of cash now and each year that they continue to use the product. (That 25% maintenance cost still makes my eyes water when I think about it )

The documentation for WSS is incorporated into the main manual.

I must say that I do avoid using web interfaces where possible (which so far for has been always), so I am not very well qualified to comment on that particular issue. But hey, when did that ever stop anyone?

I have yet to see a web OLAP implementation that copes well with the need to have 26 weeks of data in column headings and more than a page of row headings (which is how a typical merchandise plan Open to Buy sheet looks) - the lack of freeze panes functionality is the killer here as far as usability is concerned. (Also I think my experiences with TM1 web scarred me for life ). I did manage to set up a test though using only the instructions in the V 2.5 manual .

Obviously for simpler distributed input jobs the web interface has its place and the Palo implementation feels as good as the TM1 one to my mind - it seems to require similar level of expertise / patience/ ability to run widershins around the church after sacrificing a black cockerel etc.

As you will realise from the above comments I have not deployed it in anger though.

One reason I am wary of web for both TM1 and Palo is the browser compatibility issue. Which version of IE are you using - I use Firefox, Chrome and Safari, in fact just about any browser, before I resort to IE, and if it's IE6 you are talking about then just about nothing works properly with it. I have heard many people say that their corporate policy is to remain with the bag of bugs and security vulnerabilities which is IE6 because their 8 year old online accounting/personnel/sales system requires it and the vendors haven't upgraded their software to work with later (more standards compatible) versions.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/17681961/Why- ... ive-to-IE6

Interestingly in Norway they have almost eradicated IE6.

http://www.larre.com/2009/02/23/the-nor ... -possible/

[Michel Zijlema]

Hi,

We already have quite some happy customers running PALO instead of TM1. For us PALO has proven to be a true alternative to TM1.

Tools like PALO, PowerOLAP and Infor PM offer comparable functionality like TM1 Server (in-memory, multi-cube, read/write, real-time) and will well suit most of the financial planning applications. TM1 is still the 'Coca Cola' in this genre of tools (regarding history, user interface, scalability and the still unparalleled TI upload speed), but for most applications a 'regular cola' will do.

The applications we've delivered using Palo vary from finance applications (reporting, budgeting, GM analysis), Inventory control (stock aging, supply chain performance), HR (statistics/performance) to weight/balance calculation/simulation for big sailing boats for a shipyard.

For data integration and (web) reporting we mostly use the non-open source components Cubeware Importer (for PALO also available as freeware named IMP:Palo) and Cubeware Cockpit. The fun thing about these tools is that they connect to a lot of multi-dimensional (TM1, PALO, Infor PM, PowerOlap, Essbase, MSAS and more) and relational databases using the same interface. A Cockpit report (screen) can show multiple graphs and tables connected to TM1, PALO, Essbase and SQL Server relational at the same time. The Cubeware Importer does not get near the Turbo Integrator upload speed, but has (IMO) a easy to use/learn interface, has a migration wizard that can help you converting your multi-dimensional database from one vendor to the other and has good scheduling possibilities (and can trigger TI jobs, Alan!).
But you can deliver solutions without these components as within the PALO Suite everything (ETL server, Worksheet Server) is available (and improving al the time) to create the required applications - free extensions possible with the Tensegrity JPalo (web) client and ETL Server GUI (and soon the renewed Open Office Calc add-in).


Michel

[Jeroen Eynikel]

Of course Palo doesn't have the 20 year history that TM1 does, but I'm with Mr Pendse on this one - If you want nimble development and agile support you look to the smaller guys now. There is no necessary correlation between being small / open source / low price and not being appropriate for a serious project / large company. Look at how TM1 started.

Well your experience may be different than mine. I am not saying anything about the product qualities of PALO vs TM1. I am saying that it is a huge and often unsurmountable drawback that there is no big name behind the product.

The situation was very different when TM1 started vs the current situation. When TM1 started the market was still very fragmented, and multidimensional models were something new. Nowadays you are in a situation in which Microsoft + SAP + IBM + Oracle have commited to this market. 9 out of 10 managers will want to default to one of these four by default. (even if it may not be the smartest choice, from their perspective it is definitely the safest choice).

And even when the market was still fragmented I found that TM1 had a hard time competing with many of the other products purely based on the size of the company behind it. It won some large deals yes, but only because it had unique must have features compared to the competition.

Which must have features does Palo have compared to TM1?
We have been hearing about open source software taking over the windows empire for how long now? 10 Years? 15 Years? In reality open source software has barely made a dent in the windows emprire, and is often limited to low end things like mailservers, if used at all. I expect no different from the BI market to be honest.

Just think of how hard it already is to find capable TM1 resources. I think you can be certain the situation is much worse with Palo. Do you really see a manager of a multinational going for Palo? Really?

Maybe Palo is an alternative for the poster. I don't know the size of the company he is working for, his clout within the organisation and how critical the application is.

The trend I have been seing in the market the last few years is rather the reverse though. I have seen large companies (finally) make inventories of all the different BI software packages that somehow got implemented at this or that department with one goal: reduce the number of different software packages and focus on the ones that have unique features. I expect this standardization trend to continue, not reverse.

[Marcus Scherer]

The trend I have been seing in the market the last few years is rather the reverse though. I have seen large companies (finally) make inventories of all the different BI software packages that somehow got implemented at this or that department with one goal: reduce the number of different software packages and focus on the ones that have unique features. I expect this standardization trend to continue, not reverse.

Of course, IT managers go for products that will still exist in ten years and every large company has a product strategy, but from my experience all larger companies have a fragmented BI landscape. The departments have special requirements and are always looking for alternatives because working with the packages of the big players is not efficient. Of course, you may find a lot of BO and Cognos programmers but how many master the SDK to fulfill special requirements?
For single solutions and for smaller companies products like PALO will stay an alternative. Departments take a low risk for working with PALO. They can always go back to Excel or forward to a new product. So if it helps and te value/price ratio is good, why not?

Regards,
M.

[Jeroen Eynikel]

Of course, IT managers go for products that will still exist in ten years and every large company has a product strategy, but from my experience all larger companies have a fragmented BI landscape. The departments have special requirements and are always looking for alternatives because working with the packages of the big players is not efficient. Of course, you may find a lot of BO and Cognos programmers but how many master the SDK to fulfill special requirements?

Agreed that large companies have a fragmented BI landscape. But the trend is that this is diminishing. I have seen the same exercise at 3 large (i.e. 20K+ employees) companies in the last two years.

- Step 1: make an inventory of all the BI software currently in use
- Step 2: make a shortlist of the BI packages that will be strategic from now on. I.e. any new implementation 'has to' be in one of the shortlisted packages unless that is really impossible.
- Step 3: gradually remove all the 'departemental' non shortlisted packages.

I expect this to continue.

For single solutions and for smaller companies products like PALO will stay an alternative. Departments take a low risk for working with PALO. They can always go back to Excel or forward to a new product. So if it helps and te value/price ratio is good, why not?

Regards,
M.

That I can agree with. Now it remains to be seen whether threadstarter is working for such a company

[cwilliamson]

I do work for a small company, about 30 employees. We have a single IT manager, but she isn't involved with our TM1 use. My colleague and I are the only ones who use TM1, so we do everything and can really use whatever software we want, as long as it meets our needs and is within budget.

So we are in the perfect situation for using Palo, but the web front end is what's holding us back. We need to have a stable data input interface for clients. I have the manual for WSS 2.0 and the info sheet which states that WSS 3 will not be compatible with IE until the final release. Does anyone know if WSS 3 is close to the final release? Will WSS 2 still be supported after WSS 3 is released? I think it is easier to create the websheets in Excel and upload them than creating them in the WSS 3 software.

Charlotte

[Michel Zijlema]

Will WSS 2 still be supported after WSS 3 is released?

Yes, see my remarks from the PALO Open.

Here are some interesting reads regarding product selection and large vendors:
http://www.managingautomation.com/maonl ... 846?page=1
http://www.it-financeconnection.com/ris ... hallenges/
Both based on independent research (BI Survey 8, formerly known as the OLAP Survey).

Michel

[pmerrill]

Just think of how hard it already is to find capable TM1 resources. I think you can be certain the situation is much worse with Palo. Do you really see a manager of a multinational going for Palo? Really?

I must agree on this point. We are a mid size global company with 2,200 employees across the globe. The issue we have is that TM1 is being used by a select few people within finance (about 12) but since TM1 is a tool and not really an application (meaning there is a lot of build required) we find that we can't keep TM1 build knowledge in the company. A person with good TM1 experience doesn't want to work for us because we don't have enough work on and they can get better money contracting. Good TM1 specialists in Sydney (Australia) are currently running at $AUD1,500 to $AUD1,600 per day and a recruiter at a local recruitment company I know indicated that if he could find 15 TM1 developers he could place them within a day! Alternative consulting companies come and go and the overall cost of TM1 maintenance fee plus consulting services to maintain the cubes is over $150K per annum, which is a lot for us.

What we are looking for is more of an application that can be configured rather than a tool that requires build. The only application that seems to come close to allow us to consolidate multiple regional accounts (forex required), budget, forecast and deliver statutory and financial reporting is Hyperion HFM. The alternative from IBM is either TM1 alone (build required) or TM1 plus Cognos Controller, which is very expensive. The other alternative, Cognos Planning, doesn't seem to handle consolidation and also appears to be targeted at very big companies (> 10,000 FTEs with lots of finance and IT budget).

Palo looks interesting, and if we were a smaller company with some techno geeks welded in place, then perhaps we'd use instead of Excel but we need a name brand with access to local consulting expertise and that appears to limit us to offerings from Oracle, IBM and SAP.

Can anyone offer any credible (on my terms) alternatives? I'd love to look at them.