Microstrategy vs. Business Objects: A Comparison White Paper by Microstrategy

MicroStrategy vs.
Business Objects
A Comparison White Paper by MicroStrategy

Copyright Information
All Contents Copyright © 2007 MicroStrategy Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.
MicroStrategy, MicroStrategy 6, MicroStrategy 7, MicroStrategy 7i, MicroStrategy 7i Evaluation Edition, MicroStrategy 7i Olap Services, MicroStrategy 8, MicroStrategy Evaluation Edition, MicroStrategy
Administrator, MicroStrategy Agent, MicroStrategy Architect, MicroStrategy BI Developer Kit, MicroStrategy Broadcast Server, MicroStrategy Broadcaster, MicroStrategy Broadcaster Server, MicroStrategy
Business Intelligence Platform, MicroStrategy Consulting, MicroStrategy CRM Applications, MicroStrategy Customer Analyzer, MicroStrategy Desktop, MicroStrategy Desktop Analyst, MicroStrategy Desktop
Designer, MicroStrategy eCRM 7, MicroStrategy Education, MicroStrategy eTrainer, MicroStrategy Executive, MicroStrategy Infocenter, MicroStrategy Intelligence Server, MicroStrategy Intelligence Server
Universal Edition, MicroStrategy MDX Adapter, MicroStrategy Narrowcast Server, MicroStrategy Objects, MicroStrategy OLAP Provider, MicroStrategy SDK, MicroStrategy Support, MicroStrategy Telecaster,
MicroStrategy Transactor, MicroStrategy Web, MicroStrategy Web Business Analyzer, MicroStrategy World, Alarm, Alarm.com, Alert.com, Angel, Angel.com, Application Development and Sophisticated Analysis,
Best In Business Intelligence, Centralized Application Management, Changing The Way Government Looks At Information, DSSArchitect, DSS Broadcaster, DSS Broadcaster Server, DSS Office, DSSServer, DSS
Subscriber, DSS Telecaster, DSSWeb, eBroadcaster, eCaster, eStrategy, eTelecaster, Information Like Water, Insight Is Everything, Intelligence Through Every Phone, Your Telephone Just Got Smarter, Intelligence
To Every Decision Maker, Intelligent E-Business, IWAPU, Personal Intelligence Network, Personalized Intelligence Portal, Query Tone, Quickstrike, Rapid Application Development, Strategy.com, Telepath, Telepath
Intelligence, Telepath Intelligence (and Design), MicroStrategy Intelligent Cubes, The E-Business Intelligence Platform, The Foundation For Intelligent E-Business, The Integrated Business Intelligence Platform
Built For The Enterprise, The Intelligence Company, The Platform For Intelligent E-Business, The Power Of Intelligent eBusiness, The Power Of Intelligent E-Business, The Scalable Business Intelligence Platform
Built For The Internet, Industrial-Strength Business Intelligence, Office Intelligence, MicroStrategy Office, MicroStrategy Report Services, MicroStrategy Web MMT, MicroStrategy Web Services, Pixel Perfect,
MicroStrategy Mobile and MicroStrategy Integrity Manager are all registered trademarks or trademarks of MicroStrategy Incorporated.
All other products are trademarks of their respective holders. Specifications subject to change without notice. MicroStrategy is not responsible for errors or omissions. MicroStrategy makes no warranties or
commitments concerning the availability of future products or versions that may be planned or under development.
Patent Information
This product is patented. One or more of the following patents may apply to the product sold herein: U.S. Patent Nos. 6,154,766, 6,173,310, 6,260,050, 6,263,051, 6,269,393, 6,279,033, 6,501,832, 6,567,796, 6,587,547, 6,606,596,
6,658,093, 6,658,432, 6,662,195, 6,671,715, 6,691,100, 6,694,316, 6,697,808, 6,704,723, 6,707,889, 6,741,980, 6,765,997, 6,768,788, 6,772,137, 6,788,768, 6,792,086, 6,798,867, 6,801,910, 6,820,073, 6,829,334, 6,836,537,
6,850,603, 6,859,798, 6,873,693, 6,885,734, 6,888,929, 6,895,084, 6,940,953, 6,964,012, 6,977,992, 6,996,568, 6,996,569, 7,003,512, 7,010,518, 7,016,480, 7,020,251, 7,039,165, 7,082,422, 7,113,993, 7,127,403, 7,174,349,
7,194,457, 7,197,461, 7,228,303, 7,260,577, 7,266,181 and 7,272,212. Other patent applications are pending.
MicroStrategy vs. Business Objects
I. Executive Summary.. . . . . . . . . .................................................................................. 5
II. MicroStrategy Perspective on the SAP Acquisition of Business Objects............................... 6
III. MicroStrategy – A Market Proven, Industrial-Strength Technology.. ................................ 10
MicroStrategy 8 Overview.. . ................................................................................ 10
Why Companies Choose MicroStrategy.. .................................................................. 10
IV. Comparison of MicroStrategy and Business Objects on Key BI Requirements.. .................... 11
V. Critical Questions to Ask When Evaluating MicroStrategy and Business Objects.................. 16
VI. Top 10 Points to Consider When Migrating from the Business Objects Version 5
and 6 to XI.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................................................ 25

I. Executive Summary
In the business intelligence marketplace, MicroStrategy competes vigorously with vendors such as Business Objects.
At first glance, both MicroStrategy 8 and Business Objects XI Release 2 can be used to report and analyze corporate
data, providing business insight to organizations. However, once customers implement these business intelligence
(BI) solutions, they recognize critical differences derived from the architecture and paradigms of these very different
technologies. Key architectural differences affect the variety of report types, the breadth and depth of analysis, as well
as the cost required to maintain the BI application. The technology and architectural differences result in disparities
in performance, scalability, usability, efficiency and reliability of the system; all of which impact user adoption and
ultimately, the success of the BI project.
Ironically, as user and business requirements have become more complex, IT budgets have come under increasing
pressure. Business intelligence applications must now be developed, deployed and maintained with the minimum of
IT resources, while serving more users across the global organization. Clearly, the BI architecture can be either a liability
or an asset to IT departments. A technologically superior architecture will meet all the needs of the end user, while
minimizing the amount of IT maintenance and administration. An inferior architecture will require redundant and
repetitive administration, and the constant development of one-off workarounds.
MicroStrategy technology is based on a completely relational object-oriented metadata model that insulates the BI
application from changes in the data and business environment. This centralized and reusable metadata is self-
maintaining and adapts real-time to changes in user requirements, data schemas and business logic. In MicroStrategy,
report developers do not need to duplicate metadata definitions across reports as they do in Business Objects. This
duplication increases the cost of ownership and change management effort of the BI application. With MicroStrategy,
IT departments have an industrial-strength administration infrastructure on which they can rely to maintain their BI
applications with ever increasing economies of scale.
Securing corporate data is a top priority in today’s enterprise BI applications. Drug prescription records, human
resources records, cell phone call records and financial transactions are just a few types of sensitive data. The security
requirements become even more urgent when information is distributed via extranets or when users drill from the
high-level performance reports to detailed transaction information, anywhere in the data warehouse. MicroStrategy
provides airtight security with 128-bit end-to-end encryption and cell level protection applied automatically across all
reports and all data. Business Objects does not provide the same level of security across the entire product set out-of-
the-box and requires security setup and maintenance from multiple locations.
Business Objects has pursued a product strategy based on technology acquisitions which can be directly correlated
with its lower levels of customer loyalty1. Conversely, MicroStrategy has concentrated on a single product architecture
that spans reporting, ad-hoc query, analysis, proactive notification, scorecards and dashboards under the same user
interface and metadata, thus ensuring a single “version of the truth.” Business Objects XI Release 2 still requires heavy
desktop dependence and is still comprised of many different architectures and interfaces. In Business Objects, much
MicroStratEGY VS. Business objects
development must be done on the desktop using either the Crystal Reports developer tool for reporting or Business
Objects Desktop Intelligence for ad-hoc query. Users will need Web Intelligence for ad-hoc query, will need Voyager,
an OLAP viewer, for OLAP analysis, will need Crystal Reports Explorer for formatted reports, will need Dashboard
Manager and Xcelsius for dashboards, and will need Performance Manager for scorecards. A greater number of
different architectures means more maintenance effort for IT. A greater number of user interfaces means more
training for end users, elevating the total cost of ownership of the business intelligence application.
1
The OLAP Survey 6- Author: Nigel Pendse http://www.survey.com/olap/

For over a decade, MicroStrategy customers have built thousands of mission-critical BI applications with
MicroStrategy technology. With an administration-friendly architecture, robust security, a self-service zero-footprint
Web interface, and proven user and data scalability, MicroStrategy 8 is the only business intelligence vendor to
obtain the highest technology score from the leading industry analyst firm’s Vendor Ratings. The most respected
independent survey in the industry, The OLAP Survey 6, stated that MicroStrategy surpassed Business Objects in
delivering higher business value and better technical support resulting in the highest customer loyalty ratings across
any BI vendor.
This document discusses in detail the important characteristics of the MicroStrategy 8 architecture, the key
differences between MicroStrategy 8 and Business Objects XI Release 2, and the critical questions that should be
asked when evaluating Business Objects and MicroStrategy. Conclusions are rooted in publicly available documents
and not subject to individual interpretation.
II. M
icroStrategy’s Perspective on the SAP Acquisition of
Business Objects
In October 2007, SAP announced its plans to acquire Business Objects for $4.8 Billion ($6.8 Billion). As a leading
provider of business intelligence (BI) software, MicroStrategy has closely followed this announcement. We would
like to share our perspectives on the impact of this acquisition on the BI market.
A Shakeout in the BI Market
We believe that this acquisition is a continuation of a shakeout process in the BI market. Although Business
Objects has grown to considerable size through a long series of acquisitions, these acquisitions have masked some
fundamental weaknesses in its technology offerings. Business Objects’ BI products are fragmented, lacking both
scalability and integration, making them inappropriate for many applications in the new generation of enterprise BI.
In the markets for Departmental BI and Small to Medium-Sized Business (SMB) BI, Business Objects faces increasingly
stiff competition from Microsoft and various start-up BI companies who have targeted the same space. In the
Budgeting/Planning/Forecasting market space, Business Objects faces difficult competition from the more established
products from Hyperion (now Oracle), Adaytum (now Cognos), and from organic offerings from the ERP vendors.
MicroStrategy: Best in Business Intelligence
MicroStrategy is well positioned for success in the market as a leading pure-play BI vendor with a fully organic
architecture. Our niche is “industrial-strength” BI which is ideally suited for large organizations with vast amounts
of data, large user populations, and who need end-user analytical self-service. We have maintained our consistent
focus on this market, and we continue to relentlessly enhance our technology to provide a high level of service to
our customers.

Important Questions to Ask About This Acquisition
1. Why
was Business Objects so eager to be acquired?
We believe that Business Objects needed to be acquired because it had accumulated such a large collection of
non-integrated technologies in a market where organic technical integration is essential for providing enterprise
BI solutions. Business Objects’ array of disparate technologies has diluted its focus, resulting in poor license
results across its product lines. Business Objects needed a large buyer, such as SAP, to act as a lifeline to give it
a new, and more pliable, market in which to pitch its range of disparate products.
2. Did
SAP rush into the purchase of Business Objects?
Some analysts suggest that SAP rushed into the purchase of Business Objects and paid a premium price, even
though Business Objects warned that Q3 revenues and earnings would be well below Wall Street estimates.
We question whether the acquisition was a defensive move by SAP to prevent a competitor from acquiring
Business Objects. If there was no competition, SAP would have waited for Business Objects to announce its Q3
results and potentially purchased the company for significantly less than the $6.8 Billion purchase price.
If the Business Objects acquisition was part of a well-considered acquisition strategy and strategic plan, then
why would SAP have purchased OutlookSoft just two months earlier? OutlookSoft competes directly with
Business Objects’ Cartesis.
If SAP rushed into the purchase, it likely did so without fully analyzing the quality of Business Objects’ product
set, Business Objects’ competitive position in the market, and the inability of Business Objects’ sales force to
position all of its overlapping products. The other hidden liability for SAP is the pervasive difficulty that Business
Objects’ customers have experienced in migrating to XI Release 2. A large percentage of Business Objects’
customers still have not successfully migrated to XI Release 2 after more than two years of the product being
on the market.
3. W
ill Business Objects’ customers be forced to undergo even more major migrations?
Unless SAP maintains Business Objects purely as a portfolio investment, it is likely that Business Objects’ various
architectures will be changed to help them integrate with the more cohesive SAP suite. The implication is that
several major migrations are ahead for Business Objects’ customers. Many of these customers, who are not also
SAP customers, will be forced to undergo these migrations with no direct benefit.
By contrast, MicroStrategy customers have not undergone any architecture migrations since the major re-architecting
of MicroStrategy that was completed in 2000 with MicroStrategy 7. Our new modern and organic architecture is
expected to have a long life ahead.
4. W
ill Business Objects’ technology become even less applicable for data warehousing?
As SAP influences Business Objects’ product set to be more aligned with the needs of SAP customers and SAP
applications, the design priorities of Business Objects’ products will change. They will become less focused on the
needs for standard data warehouses. While Business Objects and SAP will probably claim that Business Objects’
technology will be optimized for both SAP BI and enterprise data warehouses, the hard fact is that modern
enterprise software is so complicated that it can only be optimized for one major architecture.

“Other acquisitions that SAP has made have tended to end up being engulfed in its maw and never seeing the
light of day again. Worse, the technology it acquires tends to end up being specifically targeted at SAP customers
even when the company has said that won’t happen. For example, when SAP acquired TopTier it was quite explicit
that company’s product would continue to be marketed to non-SAP customers. And was it? In theory perhaps, in
practice no.” Philip Howard, Director of Research - Technology, Bloor Research, October 7, 2007
By contrast, MicroStrategy’s development priorities are driven by the needs of enterprise BI, the cornerstone of
which is high performance support for very large relational data warehouses.
5. How will Business Objects and SAP reconcile their overlapping technologies? What will happen to the
customers as products are reconciled?
There is significant overlap within the SAP and Business Objects’ product suites. Customers with products that
are undergoing integration will face painful migrations. Customers with products that are not being integrated
face the likelihood that SAP will slow development on those products, and ultimately “sunset” them.
Analysts have expressed concerns about SAP’s ability to produce a comprehensive product road map in a timely fashion.
“Until both companies go through a formal product road map exercise, which may take at least a few months,
it is unclear which products will remain front and center of SAP’s Performance Management strategy and which
ones will be relegated to the ‘second class citizen’ status.” Boris Evelson, Forrester, October 7, 2007
Consider these significant areas of product overlap between the two companies:
PRODUCT CATEGORY BUSINESS OBJECTS SAP
Dashboards and Scorecards Xcelsius, Dashboard Manager, Crystal Vision Visual Composer, Web Application Designer
Query, Analysis and Reporting Web Intelligence, OLAP Intelligence, Voyager, BEx Web Analyzer, BEx Analyzer, ABAP™,
Crystal Reports, Cartesis, Inxight Software BEx Report Designer, Pilot
Office Plug-ins Live Office BEx Analyzer

Application Infrastructure Nsite (on demand), crystalreports.com SAP® xApps™
Vertical and Horizontal Apps Vertical and Horizontal Apps
Desktop Design Tools Desktop Intelligence, Designer BEx Query Designer
Portals InfoView SAP NetWeaver® Portal
Performance Management or SRC Software, ALG Software, Cartesis SEM-BCS, BPS, Netweaver® BI-Integrated
CPM Planning, OutlookSoft, Netweaver® BI

Advanced Planner and Optimizer, mySAP
ERP Express Planning
Master Data Management Metadata Manager, Composer SAP NetWeaver® Master Data Management
ETL / EII / EIM Data Integrator (Acta), Data Federator Data Extraction routines to populate SAP BI
(Medience), Data Quality (Firstlogic,
FUZZY! Informatik)
Mobile Mobile Interactive Viewing (InfoView Mobile) SAP NetWeaver® Mobile

By contrast, MicroStrategy offers its customers a unified architecture with plug-n-play modules that allows its users
to start with small, narrowly focused BI applications, and grow to a fully integrated architecture that scales across
an enterprise. With MicroStrategy, each new modular addition adds dramatic new functionality, and incrementally
improves value to everything they have previously deployed.
6. What are the chances of a smooth integration for Business Objects and SAP?
Business Objects and SAP appear to be a cultural mismatch on several levels:
• Applications company vs. platform company

• SAP is an applications company to its very core. It has a questionable track record marketing and selling
platform technology.
• Business Objects’ platform priorities and architecture will ultimately be subservient to SAP’s application
priorities since SAP’s applications business generates many times the revenue of Business Objects.
• Departmental vs. enterprise culture
• Business Objects’ sales and engineering has focused on expedient solutions for departmental solutions.
• SAP’s sales and engineering has focused on cohesive solutions at enterprise-scale.
• SAP has an unproven track record of integrating third party platform technology
• Since inception, SAP has pursued an organic growth strategy and has never made an acquisition of this
magnitude. “We believe there will be significant integration risks since SAP has not made an acquisition
of this size before.” Pacific Growth Equities, October 7, 2007
MicroStrategy’s Commitment to Our Customers and to Business Intelligence
MicroStrategy is now the second largest independent BI provider in the market. As an independent company,
we listen to our BI customers for our direction – not Waldorf GE, not Redmond WA, not Redwood Shores CA.
MicroStrategy is entirely focused on BI technology, not financial applications, not ETL, not EII, and not MDM,
because we believe that there is still a lot of hard innovative work to be done before BI achieves its full potential.
That work requires intense focus, not caretaking.
As an independent BI vendor, MicroStrategy’s technology will continue to be optimized to interoperate with a

diversity of market-leading technologies including DBMSs, ETL, server platforms, portal platforms, development
tools, and web browsers, because this is the same diversity that exists in our customers’ real environments. Our
intention is not to lock customers into a single technology stack. MicroStratEGY VS. Business objects
As an independent vendor, we are able to dedicate 100% of our resources and energy into making each one of our
customer’s BI implementations highly successful. MicroStrategy is committed to delivering the best-engineered BI
technology to make our customers successful – helping them run their businesses more efficiently, more profitably,
with lower risk, and with faster growth.

III. MicroStrategy – A Market Proven, Industrial-Strength Technology
The MicroStrategy architecture is the result of 4 years of development and 5 years of subsequent refinement, driven by
the needs of the most demanding BI applications in the world. MicroStrategy is an industrial-strength BI technology,
uniquely capable of serving BI application requirements characterized by the largest scale, most sophisticated analytics,
highest report volumes, and most users. This caliber of BI technology is now being sought after by companies, not
just for their most demanding BI applications, but for the purpose of hosting all of their BI applications – standardizing
all BI onto a single, highly-functional and economical architecture and reaping significant economies of scale and
enterprise-wide consistency.
Unlike BI Suites offered by other vendors like Business Objects, MicroStrategy offers the only organically grown BI
architecture. All of the MicroStrategy 8 components were expressly built to work within a unified architecture and
not as separate standalone products or acquired technologies that were subsequently joined together.
MicroStrategy 8 Overview
Launched in 2005, MicroStrategy 8 offers the latest in technical innovations with over 2,000 enhancements across
the platform. One of the key differentiators of MicroStrategy 8 is its integrated BI platform, eliminating the need for
companies to use numerous distinct technologies from different vendors for reporting, analysis, and performance
monitoring. MicroStrategy 8 provides a BI platform that companies can standardize on for all their BI needs.
With a scalable architecture and a single metadata, users can seamlessly navigate from scorecards and dashboards
to reports and analysis without being required to open and close multiple BI tools and navigate dissimilar interfaces.
MicroStrategy 8’s newly designed Web interface is specifically tailored for the business user. The user interface
includes an array of “one-click” actions with familiar paradigms to make business users more productive. For the first
time, users can format reports and scorecards in WYSIWYG (what-you-see-is-what-you-get) mode and leverage the
formatting skills they already have to radically reduce the time it takes to develop and deploy new reports.
Why Companies Choose MicroStrategy?
1. Integrated architecture: The MicroStrategy product set is built from a single architectural foundation, delivering all
5 Styles of BI: Scorecards and Dashboards; Reporting; OLAP; Advanced Analysis; Alerts and Proactive Notification.
2. Full featured Web interface: MicroStrategy’s Web interface delivers a Windows-like feeling with drag-and-drop
interactivity from any Web browser. The advanced Web architecture is zero-footprint, using no Java or Active X
controls, and delivers a rich reporting experience both inside and outside the firewall.
3. Seamless integration of reporting, analysis, and monitoring: MicroStrategy can embed OLAP features
directly into enterprise reports like scorecards and dashboards, providing a seamless user experience that uncovers
root causes without the need for programming or switching interfaces.
4. Ease-of-use and self-service: MicroStrategy’s unique WYSIWYG report design and editing allows MicroStrategy end
users to easily design and refine reports over the Web using familiar skills similar to Microsoft® PowerPoint or Excel.
5. High performance scaling to thousands of users: Unlike other BI providers, MicroStrategy software expands
with the application to efficiently scale from hundreds to thousands of people.
10
6. Proven data scalability: For the past six years, The OLAP Surveys have ranked MicroStrategy highest in data
scalability. With terabyte-size databases commonplace, MicroStrategy’s field-proven technology enables customers
to deploy more BI applications with greater analytic sophistication and user functionality.
7. Automated report maintainability: Dynamic metadata architecture ensures that changes ripple throughout all
reports automatically.
8. Pervasive security and user administration: Security is automatically applied to all users, reports, and data
through role-based user administration.
9. Engineered on a single code base: MicroStrategy is widely recognized for its meticulously engineered
software based on a single code base, scaling to organizations and applications of all sizes; leveraging any
hardware, operating system, and data source infrastructure while making BI more approachable for the average
business user.
IV. C
omparison of MicroStrategy and Business Objects On Key
BI Requirements
Business intelligence has the power to provide performance feedback and visibility to all people in an organization,
enabling businesses to make thousands of better decisions every day. However, not all BI technologies deliver on this
promise, falling short on a number of key requirements demanded of enterprise BI applications. The following table
outlines the 13 overarching and important criteria by which all modern BI technologies need to be assessed, and
provides a side-by-side evaluation of MicroStrategy 8 and Business Objects XI along these requirements.
KEY BI REQUIREMENT MICROSTRATEGY 8 BUSINESS OBJECTS XI RELEASE 2
Unified BI Architecture YES NO

MicroStrategy’s unified architecture provides Business Objects (BO) is a loosely integrated
• Seamless integration of
a seamless integration of analytics and set of tools, not a unified architecture.
analytics and reporting for
reporting from a single Web interface.
root cause analysis Release 2 consists of multiple overlapping
• Single code base across MicroStrategy is a single code base that is tools (with different interfaces and user
platforms truly platform independent. A single shared paradigms); multiple different code
• Single Web interface metadata consisting of all reports and bases, multiple separate metadatas and
• Single metadata underlying reporting objects ensures one repositories. This multiplicity results in
version of the truth. A unified Web interface redundant setup and administration tasks.
means a common reporting and analysis
BO’s portal, Infoview, is necessary to
paradigm for all users.
combine up to 10 different user interfaces

together since BO reports and reporting
objects do not fully integrate across their
distinct tools, or from their desktop to
Web interfaces.
11
Market Proven Enterprise YES NO

Scalability and Performance
The MicroStrategy platform is designed for BO performance is constrained by its heavy
enterprise scalability. MicroStrategy’s ROLAP dependence on the desktop processor and
• 64-bit business intelligence
and multi-pass SQL approach leverages its inefficient SQL engines.
processing
the latest innovations from database
• Minimal re-query of the A high degree of workstation-based
technology. It efficiently processes large
database processing required in both BO and Crystal
volumes of transaction level data in the
• Multi-layer caching architectures means that most analysis is
database, minimizing network traffic.
technology performed inefficiently on the workstation
• Customer references for Data is automatically cached at multiple or Web server, and does not leverage the full
large user and data scalability levels to reduce redundant computations power of the database. Unnecessarily high
customer deployments and network traffic. The MicroStrategy amounts of detail data is often extracted
• Aggregate awareness SQL engine’s aggregate awareness can out of the database and replicated on the
• Multi-pass SQL dynamically determine the most efficient desktop or Web server for subsequent
• Distributed processing with table in every analysis. 64-bit processing processing in the “BO microcube.”
the relational database allows MicroStrategy to support much
BO’s basic SQL engine does not support
• Minimize network traffic greater numbers of users and data sizes
true multi-pass SQL and many other
while improving performance.
performance enhancing features, such as
automatic aggregate awareness and many
database specific tuning optimizations. BO’s
aggregate awareness is manual, requiring
tedious hand-coding of the specific table
access for each calculation on each report.
BO cannot leverage the extra memory
provided by 64-bit hardware.
Reusable and Rich YES Limited
Metadata Layer
MicroStrategy’s object-oriented metadata BO’s multiple separate metadata models
• Robust abstraction layer defines an enterprise’s business layer in (Universes, Business Views and Metric
(where all physical constructs a single repository. The metadata objects Universes) vary in functionality supported
can be modeled logically and can be nested as building blocks to create and are stored in different repositories. Many
hidden from business user) more complex objects. If a metadata object calculations, conditions and prompts are
• Highly reusable metadata changes, every other metadata object typically created anew for each new report
• Automatic change dependent on it automatically changes. This and cannot be easily used as building blocks
management ensures consistency across business defini- to build other reporting objects.
• Object oriented metadata tions and minimizes the number of objects
Crystal stores many report objects e.g., some
to maintain.
prompt values and formulas, directly in the re-
MicroStrategy assembles all metadata port, and not in the Business View metadata
objects necessary for a report and dynami- model minimizing the ability to share report
cally builds the report SQL at run-time. It objects across users. With Desktop Intel-
does not store a finished report as a static ligence much functionality is locally-stored in
SQL statement. the report file, and not fully shared in the Uni-
verse across users. These include user objects,
formulas, local variables, and functions.
Local, or one-off, reporting objects in BO require
much redundant setup and effort to maintain as
changes occur to business rules, the database or
other underlying reporting objects.
12
Interactive WYSIWYG Web YES LIMITED

Interface
Business users create highly formatted User interactivity available via the Web
• Fully interactive reporting, reports leveraging any metadata object interface is minimal and differs widely
completely zero-footprint and using a zero-footprint WYSIWYG between the multiple BO product interfaces.
over the Web from any design paradigm that drastically shortens
As Crystal development is mainly limited
browser the report development time.
to the desktop the Crystal Explorer Web
• WYSIWYG document design
End users have a high degree of interface is primarily for static viewing of
and editing over the Web
interactivity and are able to create, previously created desktop reports. For
• Self-service
manipulate and format information example, it is not possible to sort or filter a
• Easy-to-learn, familiar
through a single Web user interface. Crystal report from the Web while viewing it.
windows on the Web
Changes are available right away without
paradigm The WYSIWYG interactivity of Web
any need to “publish” or “export”
• WYSIWYG print capability Intelligence varies considerably by program
information to other environments.
download. HTML and ASP versions of the
MicroStrategy does not rely on ActiveX. Web Intelligence interface are missing key
Report designers can use any browser. functionality and include only limited filtering,
sorting, pivoting, subtotaling and formatting.
MicroStrategy Web complements the on-
screen display with identically formatted The Java and ActiveX versions provide more
printed reports with features like page functionality but require downloads and
break logic and page setup options like have browser dependencies. Report object
“fit-to-page.” changes are not available across the entire
product set and require a “publish” and
“export” process to fully make changes
available to other users.
BO’s Web Intelligence has no built-in print
capability.
Industrial-Strength YES NO
Multi-level Security
MicroStrategy provides centralized security BO security has five fundamental
• 128-bit encryption - extranet administration across reporting, analysis weaknesses. It has security holes, it
ready and delivery. User profiles and privileges must be set up redundantly in multiple
• Integrate with any security ensure users only access the appropriate tools and interfaces, it requires excessive
infrastructure with single information and functionality. Security manual set up, it is not extranet-ready
sign-on filters provide the right access down to the and does not fully leverage existing source
• Same report yields different cell level. system security. All these things make BO
views of the information administration unnecessarily labor intensive.
MicroStrategy supports 128-bit end-to-end
based on user profiles
encryption with a zero-footprint Web Security holes include limited built-in
• Truly zero-footprint. No use
client making it a secure platform behind microcube security, no automatic data level
or download of ActiveX and
the firewall. MicroStrategy integrates with security, and limited 128-bit end-to-end
other plug-ins
existing security authentication infrastructure encryption out-of-the-box.
• Cell level security
such as LDAP, NT, and databases.
Security is overlapping and must be set
up separately for users of Crystal Reports,
Web Intelligence, and Dashboard Manager
in various metadatas (i.e., Business Views
and Universes) and multiple locations (i.e.,
Central Management Console, Designer
and Business Views Manager tools).
Data level security requires manual hand
coding of SQL WHERE clauses for each user
group, for each table, and each level of
data accessed.
Dynamic Report YES LIMITED

Personalization
In MicroStrategy, a single report can Limited prompting and basic SQL engines
• Comprehensive parameter automatically span hundreds of possible constrain BO’s report personalization
and question prompting data combinations tailored to different and typically leads to a high number of
• Security profiles personalize user needs. Advanced report parameters, redundant and overlapping reports that are
report content for individual like object and hierarchy prompts, allow often created and maintained for each user.
users users to pick the business attributes and
Several key prompt types are limited in BO,
• Report bursting KPIs to include in the report.
including column prompts, hierarchical
A single report definition for IT to maintain prompts, cascading prompts, and optional
can burst personalized information to prompts. A separate report for each type of
hundreds of users. prompt is often required. Many of Crystal’s
prompt values are typically hard coded into
each report.
13
Centralized Enterprise YES LIMITED

Administration
MicroStrategy’s centralized administration BO administration is distributed across
• Self-tuning scalable server for provides a single console for real-time user multiple tools and is missing critical
maximum performance and system management. functionality necessary to proactively
• Usage monitoring / auditing monitor and tune Web-based
MicroStrategy Enterprise Manager provides
• Controlled environment for deployments.
hundreds of KPIs and corresponding
analysis
dashboards to perform impact analysis, Users and processes are administered
• Version management /
auditing and tuning of the BI application. through multiple tools. BO security is
migration
configured in 3 different places: Central
• Single management console MicroStrategy Object Manager facilitates
Management Console, Designer and
• Automated regression testing metadata life cycle management, metadata
Crystal Business View Manager. Separate
• Automated full impact analysis dependencies and project management.
servers for each product mean multiple
MicroStrategy Integrity Manager automates points of server administration.
the report comparison process and verifies
BO’s functionality for monitoring usage,
the consistency of reports. This tool can
auditing, managing metadata, life cycle
detect, compare, and present inconsistencies
and change management and performing
in reports and data caused by changes in
impact analysis are limited and vary
the BI ecosystem. Integrity Manager alerts
by product, providing no easy way to
the system administrator of changes in a
administer a multi-product BO environment.
report. It also automatically highlights the
differences in the numeric values, SQL,
or display.
Seamless Microsoft Office YES LIMITED
Integration
MicroStrategy delivers the complete BO’s Office integration is missing key
• All Office products supported reporting and analysis environment to functionality and provides only limited
(Excel, PowerPoint, Word, Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint, Word, and access to the BO analysis environment.
Outlook) Outlook users. MicroStrategy Office
BO’s Live Office cannot fully access OLAP
• Leverage all BI reports and applications are linked to MicroStrategy
data sources. In addition, Live Office does
reporting objects security and administration, ensuring 100%
not support new report creation capability
• Full new report creation data consistency across the enterprise.
via full prompting and parameterized
• Persistent and
Users are able to access existing reports or reporting.
interchangeable formatting
create new ones. Changes are immediately
across Office and Web Formatting changes made within Microsoft
reflected interchangeably across
Office do not fully persist the next time
MicroStrategy Office and Web interfaces.
the user runs that same report. Formatting
Microsoft Office formatting changes are
changes made in Office are typically lost
preserved after automatic data updates.
when a user refreshes data.
MicroStrategy Office allows users to access
report information containing more than
64,000 rows in Microsoft Excel.
Flexible and Powerful YES NO
OLAP Analysis
The MicroStrategy SQL Engine’s ability BO provides only limited support for ad-
• Integrated predictive analytics to dynamically generate multi-pass SQL vanced analysis. BO’s latest release still has a
and forecasting with best-of- allows users to ask complex business single-pass SQL engine similar to what it had
breed data mining tools questions such as market basket and set over 10 years ago.
• Collaborative processing analysis e.g., view sales for the current
A single-pass SQL engine which does not
(between analytical year for all customers who purchased
leverage database processing features means
engine and RDBMS-based product ‘x’ last year. Users can drill
no dynamic or multi-level analysis as is required

processing) anywhere for a boundary-free speed-of-
for contribution or semi-additive analysis.
• Built-in financial and statistical thought investigative analysis.
functions Many key SQL constructs are supported
MicroStrategy’s Data Mining Services
• Business question complexity sporadically across the tools, and some are
leverages definitions from all major third-
supported by multi-pass SQL not supported at all, including no direct sup-
party data mining vendors, providing
capability port for split fact table analysis, subqueries
predictive analytics to thousands of users.
• Drill anywhere fosters and set operators, and no full leveraging of
investigative analysis MicroStrategy’s Analytical Engine provides database functions.
• Set analysis hundreds of built-in financial, statistical,
Some analysis capability is provided in BO’s
and mathematical functions. The SQL
Performance Management modules but is
Engine and the Analytical Engine work
not available in Crystal Reports, so BO’s analy-
collaboratively to ensure that processing is
sis cannot be used in formatted reporting.
performed efficiently on the optimal tier.
Drilling is limited to static predefined report
linking.
There is limited integration with 3rd party
data mining products.
14
Dynamic Enterprise Yes Limited

Dashboards and Advanced
MicroStrategy’s Dynamic Enterprise BO offers two different dashboard
Visualization Widgets
Dashboards fully leverage the MicroStrategy solutions, Crystal Xcelsius and Dashboard
8 platform. Dashboards are created using Manager, each a standalone product.
• Dashboards integrated with
reports and objects from MicroStrategy’s
industrial-strength BI platform Xcelsius has limited ability to reuse reports
single metadata. Intelligence Server provides
• Full power of ROLAP analysis and objects created in Crystal or Web
its sophisticated processing, security, caching
• Single design environment Intelligence, leading to multiple versions of
and analytical capabilities.
• Infinitely extensible the truth.
visualization Users design dashboards from MicroStrategy’s
Xcelsius does not fully take advantage of
• Advanced visualization Flash single Web interface using the already
relational data storage, instead relying on
libraries familiar design paradigm. Dashboards are
Microsoft Excel as a data storage or data
• Native parallel Flash and created in a zero-footprint Web interface,
access mechanism. As a result, Xcelsius is
DHTML visualizations pixel perfect and freeform layout.
limited in its ability to perform analysis on
• On-dashboard interactivity Dashboard designers create highly interactive large amounts of data.
• WYSIWYG design paradigm dashboards and can render them in DHTML,
Analysis on metrics in Dashboard Manager
Flash, PDF or Microsoft Office products.
is limited to a single dimension and time.
Xcelsius renders visualizations only in
Flash, and does not have the option to
render visualizations in thin-client DHTML.
Dashboard Manager cannot render
visualizations in Flash, limiting its level of
dashboard interactivity.
Heterogeneous Data Source YES NO
Access from a Single Web
MicroStrategy allows a single document to Dynamic access and presentation of data
Document
present data pulled directly from multiple from multiple dimensional data models is
• Direct access to SAP® BW, data sources. not available in Crystal.
Hyperion Essbase and
MicroStrategy’s Operational SQL Engine Different BO products are needed to access
Microsoft Analysis Services
can generate reports from data residing different kinds of data. Web Intelligence is
• Operational database
in any operational database across the required for ad-hoc query against relational
reporting with freeform SQL
organization. MicroStrategy can directly data access. Voyager is used for accessing
query SAP BW InfoCubes and QueryCubes. OLAP sources. In BO XI Release 2, Desktop
Intelligence can only access relational
sources despite previously being able to
access OLAP data sources.
Robust Enterprise Reporting YES LIMITED

• Support for wide range of MicroStrategy’s Web Interface is designed to Reporting functionality varies widely by
report styles maximize business user and report designer tool. Analysis and ad-hoc query cannot be
• Pixel-level absolute productivity. Highly formatted documents incorporated in formatted reports.
positioning are built using common desktop publishing
Formatted reporting is available in some
• In-place analysis paradigms such as rulers and pixel-level
products and not in others. Web Intel-
• Desktop publishing positioning, all over a zero-footprint Web.
ligence provides only limited formatting.
formatting
MicroStrategy offers comprehensive report Formatted dashboards are created in
• High quality printing
styles from banded reports to dashboards the stand-alone Dashboard Manager or
• Export to Excel
and scorecards. These documents are highly Xcelsius products.
interactive providing in-place analysis,
Despite being a report writing tool, Crystal
pivoting, drilling and Excel-like formatting
Reports has limitations such as not being
toolbars.
able to do: absolute positioning, freeze
pane, format templates, and hide columns.
Report consumers are unable to edit the

report layout while viewing the live report,
therefore there is no support for a real-
time WYSIWYG view of changes.
15
Information Delivery Yes Limited

• Wide range of output types: Users get personalized alerts triggered by BO’s information delivery capabilities varies
Web, print, fax, wireless dynamic events and time scheduled reports, widely by tool. Publishing Profiles used
• Alerting and Thresholds via portal, print, e-mail, wireless or file to personalize report content by recipient
• Dashboards and Scorecards servers. can only be applied to Desktop Intelligence
• Portals integration publications. There are limitations to e-mail
The MicroStrategy platform leverages highly
• Fully interactive reports and bursting and personalization with Crystal.
scalable technology that slices a single report
dashboards accessed from
and dynamically distributes personalized Web Intelligence and Crystal Reports have
mobile devices
information to the right users. Reusing a limited support capabilities for efficient high
single report across hundreds of users saves volume reporting. For example, neither
processing resources. support single-pass report bursting thereby
forcing a separate DB query for each
Users can easily assemble scorecards and
recipient of the same basic report. BO Pub-
dashboards based on existing objects and
lications lack true dynamic distribution list
integrating several data sources, without the
capabilities. Therefore, Administrators often
need of an extra application or interface.
have to manually define and maintain static
MicroStrategy Mobile allows users to run distribution lists since they cannot fully use
reports and dashboards directly on their conditions to create dynamic recipient lists.
BlackBerry® smartphones. Reports are
Business Objects Mobile Interactive Viewing
cached directly on the BlackBerry for fast,
allows users to run reports from mobile
offline viewing. Reports are fully interactive;
devices. However, users must typically log
data can be sliced and sorted; columns
in directly to a BO server to access reports,
can be locked and resized for effective
limiting users’ ability to access reports
comparisons of metrics. MicroStrategy
offline or in network dead-zones. Report
Mobile accesses the same reports and
interactivity on the mobile device is limited,
dashboards used by all other MicroStrategy
with no ability to re-order columns, sort
user interfaces, ensuring a single version
columns, or quickly view report slices via
of the truth. MicroStrategy Mobile actively
page-by attributes.
governs memory and bandwidth usage to
ensure harmonious operations with other
critical BlackBerry applications.
V. C
ritical Questions to Ask When Evaluating MicroStrategy
and Business Objects
There is a fundamental difference between the software architectures of Business Objects and MicroStrategy. Despite
the introduction of some new tangential BI functionality in Nov. 2005, Release 2 is still primarily the same Business
Objects legacy of multiple tools with disparate architectures. BO’s development efforts on the backend still have not
addressed some of BO’s fundamental architectural shortcomings. Web user scalability is still constrained and adminis-
tration is not centralized. Much core functionality is still restricted by its desktop legacy of local microcube, file-based
processing, and a basic SQL engine. Business Objects’ R&D has had to focus on product line integration at the expense
of product innovation. Growing through acquisition has left Business Objects with a loosely integrated set of tools with
multiple overlapping metadata layers. Business Objects is still some number of years away from a full unified product
offering which is truly re-architected for the Web.
16
By contrast, MicroStrategy’s code base was completely rewritten over the course of five years as a unified server-centric
architecture. MicroStrategy has been building its platform organically and keeping the utmost integrity and efficiency.
This basic difference allows MicroStrategy customers to benefit from:
• A greater range of functionality through a single Web interface and unified architecture which decreases training
and maintenance costs.
• A productive WYSIWYG editing environment which can be used across any Web browser.
• Market proven user and data scalability with more efficient use of network and server resources.
• Greater analytical breadth, including predictive analytics.
• A market-tested and bullet-proof security infrastructure.
• Lower total cost of ownership by lowering IS support and maintenance requirements.
The following questions elicit these basic MicroStrategy strengths with some very specific comparisons that should be
made when evaluating Business Objects and MicroStrategy.
1. MicroStrategy provides all the major styles of BI – Scorecards and Dashboards, Enterprise Reporting,
OLAP analysis, Predictive Analysis and Alerts and Notification from a single unified Web interface.
Why does Business Objects require two desktop products to create, and as many as four Web-based
products to deploy, a limited subset of this same BI functionality?
MicroStrategy supports analysis and reporting functionality, from dashboard creation with OLAP analysis to WYSIWYG
creation of formatted reports from a single Web interface. MicroStrategy Web allows business users to move seam-
lessly between all necessary styles of BI and combine multiple styles within a single report display.
Business Objects XI Release 2 requires a separate product and interface for each style of BI, making transition from one
style to another very cumbersome for the user and developer who has to encode and maintain the transitions. Despite
Business Objects marketing claims of an integrated architecture, Business Objects still requires a separate Crystal Reports
desktop environment for formatted reporting and a separate, somewhat overlapping, Business Objects Desktop Intel-
ligence environment for ad-hoc query and light analysis with very little functional integration between the two. From
the Web, a minimum of four Web interfaces are typically required; true formatted reporting is only available to Crystal
Reports Explorer users; ad-hoc query of relational sources requires Web Intelligence; but for OLAP source analysis, the
Voyager product is used; finally, true dashboard creation and usage requires Dashboard Manager or Xcelsius. Functional
integration between them is limited to manually coded static report linking from one interface to another. Another symp-
tom of BO’s non-integrated architecture is that core BI functionality varies widely between the products.
This Business Objects tool fragmentation negatively impacts both end users and IT administrators. End users need to
learn and use multiple interfaces and reporting paradigms. For example, reporting centers around “Business Elements” MicroStratEGY VS. Business objects
and a “Data Foundation” in Crystal Reports and is a completely different paradigm in Desktop Intelligence which uses
“classes,” “objects” and “dimensions.” End users need to know which tool other users have in order to export, publish
and share documents properly. The negative impact on IT administrators is even greater. IT administrators must create
and support reporting environments for multiple tools each with their own corresponding servers, including manually
migrating and reconciling the metadata of the various tools.
17
2. MicroStrategy’s 64-bit native platform takes advantage of customers’ investments in the latest 64-bit
hardware and operating systems from Windows to UNIX. Can Business Objects XI Release 2 leverage 64-
bit hardware and operating systems?
The MicroStrategy 64-bit platform is compiled natively to leverage the memory address space benefits from 64-bit
operating systems and microprocessors.
Business Objects XI Release 2 is compiled in 32-bit native mode even if it is running on 64-bit operating systems which
results in Business Objects not being able to leverage the benefits of 64-bit environments and customers’ 64-bit hard-
ware investments.
MicroStrategy has a more modular code base which allows just a portion of its ‘kernel’ to be compiled for the appropriate
OS-chipset combination. This allows MicroStrategy to perform very little work to support a broad range of platforms.
An inherited benefit of MicroStrategy’s unified code base is that every enhancement done in the code is common for
all the platforms supported. Therefore, “software bugs” are less prone to be introduced.
Business Objects XI Release 2 is made of a mix of C++ and Java code taken from different products requiring major
changes in order to support new environments or enhancements (e.g., 64-bit environments); the reason that Business
Objects’ UNIX versions typically lags the Windows versions.
3. MicroStrategy’s unified architecture and centralized administration minimizes the effort in developing,
broadly deploying and maintaining multiple applications across multiple platforms. Why is Business
Objects so maintenance intensive and hard to deploy broadly?
MicroStrategy’s ROLAP engine dynamically generates optimized SQL for any type of analysis, minimizing the need
for any manual workarounds or custom SQL. MicroStrategy is fully automatically aggregate aware, meaning that the
MicroStrategy Engine automatically selects, every time, the most efficient table for data retrieval.
MicroStrategy provides comprehensive centralized administration through MicroStrategy Administrator, which auto-
mates the development, deployment and maintenance of multiple applications across multiple platforms. A remote
administration console enables complete control over system monitoring of all tasks and administration of users and
objects. The Object Manager component facilitates complete life-cycle application management. Reporting objects can
be migrated easily across development, test and production environments and can be shared between users, groups,
and projects.
Business Objects is maintenance intensive and challenging to deploy primarily due to its basic SQL engine which
requires a high degree of local custom processing and manual workarounds for key functionality such as aggregate
awareness and the implementation of data security. Heavy local processing, such as is required for Business Objects’
user objects, formulas, local variables and functions, means reports are not sharable across users and must be recreated
for each user. Multiple products have their own repositories meaning redundant metadata setup and manual “export”
and “publish” processes before reports can even be statically viewed by other users.
18
Business Objects provides a very weak object oriented definition of the data and has only a basic SQL engine
which prevents BO tools from supporting automatic aggregate processing. The workaround is for a Business Objects
Administrator to manually point each calculation for each report and each user to the most efficient table. The steps
are tedious and risky because double counting is possible if “incompatible” tables, or tables not at the appropriate
calculation level, are not fully defined.
The following five steps must be performed each time a new calculation or aggregate table is added:
1. Define aggregate table(s).

2. Manually join each aggregate table to all related tables.
3. Define all possible table(s) where a calculation could be made.
4. Within each measure, list tables in order of descending size (so the
Business Objects SQL Engine knows which table to access).
5. Define all possible incompatibilities relative to all other reporting objects.
The high degree of manual setup and maintenance limits the performance, maintainability and scalability of Business
Objects deployments.
In addition, multiple metadatas and limited support for centralized administration hinders Business Objects’ deployability.
4. MicroStrategy fully supports sophisticated “n” order analysis. Why is Business Objects only suitable for
simple first order questions?
MicroStrategy provides a number of optimized features necessary to provide comprehensive sophisticated analysis at
the desired level of detail which include:
• Collaboration between MicroStrategy’s optimized SQL engine and mid-tier analytical engine in an iterative
fashion to enable “n” order calculations.
• Analytical library consisting of over 200 built-in statistical, financial and OLAP functions. In addition,
end users may define their own analytical functions and embed them into the platform.
• Integrated Set Analysis or the filtering of an attribute based on its relationship with another attribute.
In supporting this, MicroStrategy is implicitly using the result set of one analysis as a filter for a second
analysis all completely transparent to the end user.
• User-defined custom groups or dynamic virtual attributes which support multiple levels of analysis on
one report. MicroStratEGY VS. Business objects
• Nested aggregation capability to transparently support calculations at varying dynamic levels of analysis.
• 3rd party out-of-the-box integration with best-of-breed data mining systems like SPSS, SAS and IBM
Dataminer for predictive analysis
19
In MicroStrategy, all analytical sophistication either occurs seamlessly, as in the case of iterative processing and nested
aggregation, or is user defined such as with custom group definitions. No administrative support is required. In addi-
tion, the use of all of these features is fully available to Web users; any Web user with full report creation privileges can
leverage the full range of analytical sophistication.
Business Objects does not fully support the important analytical features, discussed above, across the entire product
line without customizations due to the limitations of microcube architecture and the inherent challenges of integrating
cube-based processing with database access. Business Objects offers very limited analytical functions which can be
shared across users. Crystal Reports does not fully expose RDBMS-specific analytic functions. Analysis on Metrics in
Business Objects’ Dashboard Manager is limited to a single dimension and time.
Most importantly, the Business Objects approach typically requires advanced analysis to be set up by an administrator
as a pre-defined measure via Business Objects’ Designer product. Web end users can only use existing simple measures
and apply sum, avg, min, max, count, and percentages to existing calculated values. This restricts valuable analytical
flexibility from end-users and also means that new analytical requirements typically require administrators to rebuild
universes. Given this, the sweet spot for Business Objects is simple ad-hoc query and report writing for departmen-
tal needs, where a small number of users need basic report access to summary data. Users are not able to analyze
transactional level or customer-centric data in any truly meaningful way since all data must be returned to the desktop
or Web server for processing.
Business Objects microcubes answer simple first order questions, but any further analysis requires costly non-optimized
database access. End user reporting queries will change significantly and grow as users start to explore data. Due to
local memory and disk capacity constraints which limit microcube size, users typically spend approximately 40-60%
of their time accessing the database outside of the local microcubes. The only workarounds are for users to try to
pre-select as much as possible from the universe (not without significant cost given microcube build times) or schedule
everything for batch execution. Any type of meaningful ad-hoc analysis will result in microcube explosion and multiple
trips across the network to the database. No support for multi-pass SQL means limited multi-level analytics.
Business Objects cannot answer many important business questions. Most necessary sophisticated analytics are not sup-
ported across the entire product line. Limited and manually intensive metric dimensionality means percent-to-total analysis
is impaired. Limited non-aggregatable metrics means that inventory or account balance analysis is very impaired. Limited
prompted conditional metric support means BO users are unable to prompt for sophisticated calculations which is needed
to allow the user to pick the start and end date at run time. BO’s inability to provide ranking-within-ranking means it is not
possible for BO products to transparently support important queries such as “show me my top 5 products for my top 5
customers.” Many other analytical requirements are only supported in some BO tools or through manual SQL coding.
5. MicroStrategy has a single unified highly reusable metadata layer. When will Business Objects have a
single unified metadata that is reusable and fully shared by users?
MicroStrategy reporting objects are all object-oriented. Report objects can be used as building blocks for other objects,
so the same report component can be used by multiple reports, reducing redundant work. Since MicroStrategy reports
are objects, they automatically inherit changes to related objects without any additional developer effort. For example,
if a metric’s formula changes, all reports that use that metric will seamlessly inherit the new formula. MicroStrategy’s
object-oriented metadata lowers development time by reducing redundant work, and reduces maintenance work by
minimizing the number of objects that need to be maintained.
20
Business Objects has multiple independent metadata; Business Objects Universes, Crystal Business Views, and Perfor-
mance Manager Metric Universes; none of which provide the layers of abstraction MicroStrategy’s metadata does.
Further complicating matters, the file formats between Web Intelligence documents (.WID) and Desktop Intelligence
documents (.REP) are different, making it hard to seamlessly move desktop reports to Web-based reports without
recreating various underlying reporting objects and undertaking manual Web publishing steps.
The lack of metadata integration means limited functionality with duplicate separate storage, and manual synchroniza-
tion, ultimately resulting in “multiple versions of the truth.” Most underlying reporting objects, including conditions
and calculations, formulas, variables, and user defined objects are not fully reusable across Business Objects tools.
The lack of an object orientation means multiple report versions are typically maintained and significant limitations in
metadata management exist. Business Objects does not support impact analysis and change management across the
entire product line. Proactively detecting which specific reports and reporting objects are impacted by either a change
to the physical database or a change to the ‘profit’ measure is limited and varies widely by product.
While Business Objects marketing claims they are moving towards a unified metadata and that three separate meta-
data versions are not limiting, an organization will have to determine if all the following top 10 challenges created by
multiple metadata are acceptable:
1. Metadata is populated by multiple different products: Designer, Crystal Business Views Manager, Dashboard
Manager, etc.
2. Metadata is stored in different physical repositories, requiring copying and metadata duplication across repositories
• Universes are stored in the Enterprise repository.
• Metric Universes are stored in the Performance Management repository.
3. All Metadata is not fully available from all products:

• Crystal Business Views can only be used by Crystal Reports, not by any of the other Business Objects products.
• Business Objects Live Office – Excel cannot access Business Objects Universes or Desktop Intelligence documents.
• Metric Universes are not available to Crystal users.
4. Not all functionality is available from all BO metadatas:

• Significant functionality (e.g., multiple SQL SELECT statements, embedding of objects that contain HTML
links, etc.) from Business Objects’ Universe metadata is not available to the Crystal environment.
5. Varying degrees of functionality; some functionality available in one metadata is not available in other metadata
• Crystal Business Views do not support functionality such as basic aggregation calculations, ability to handle
multiple STAR schemas, etc.
6. A manual process of some type (depending on the desired synchronization) is required to port metadatas.
While Business Objects offers various Import and Migration Wizards to assist with some of the required port-
ing, Universes that contain measures must be manually copied to the Performance Management repository.
7. Business Objects Web tools (e.g., Web Intelligence) cannot fully leverage key Desktop Intelligence reporting
objects, including Business Objects Formulas.
21
8. Metadata repositories have varying physical structures resulting in separate maintenance, including back-up
and recover processes.
• BO Enterprise Universes are file-based.
• Performance Management Metric Universes are table-based.
9. Metadata implementation differences exist

• A much higher degree of intelligence is built locally (i.e., on a by report by user basis) into Crystal Reports
vs. Business Objects Universes.
• Security is embedded in different metadata layers (i.e., Universes, Business Views) to varying degrees.
10. Migration of multiple metadatas from one product version or architecture to another is essentially a manual
process requiring significant testing and recreation of reports and underlying reporting objects.
6. MicroStrategy allows users to run any type of report from within Excel, Word and PowerPoint. Does
Business Objects’ Live Office support the access of all pre-defined Business Objects Enterprise reports
or the creation of any new report?
MicroStrategy Office provides full MicroStrategy reporting, analysis and monitoring to Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint and
Word users. Users are able to access any existing MicroStrategy report, or create new reports completely from scratch,
from within any Microsoft Office product.
Business Objects’ Live Office is missing key functionality and provides limited access to the Business Objects environment.
Live Office cannot fully access Business Objects Universes. For example, Excel cannot fully access OLAP data sources. In
addition, key functionality is missing including limited new report creation capability via full prompting and parameter-
ized reporting. Formatting changes made within Microsoft Office do not fully persist as changes made are typically lost
when a user refreshes data.
7. MicroStrategy can perform full analysis across the breadth of transaction-level data. The amount of
data that MicroStrategy can support is limited only by the amount of data the RDBMS can support.
Why is Business Objects so limited in the amount of data it can analyze?
MicroStrategy’s third generation ROLAP architecture fundamentally scales to terabytes of data by performing analysis on
the optimal server-based platform; in the database or on MicroStrategy’s Intelligence Server in an iterative fashion. By
definition, database technology scales and is the optimal location to perform high volume data processing assuming the
underlying BI platform generates highly optimized platform-specific SQL as is the case with MicroStrategy 8. MicroStrategy’s
Intelligence Server is the optimal location to perform multidimensional analysis, such as applying various OLAP functions
or performing cube-like slice and dice, fully off loading analysis not handled efficiently by a database.
Business Objects’ desktop-based processing and microcube architecture are inherently limited because building
large-sized result-set microcubes is a network bottleneck, involves extensive manual maintenance and requires very
significant hard disk capacity on the workstation. By definition, microcube sizes are fundamentally constrained by the
amount of data which can be replicated across the network, stored in desktop memory and processed on the desktop
computer. While large data volumes can be accessed, they cannot be fully analyzed.
22
Data scalability negatively impacts Web users who access desktop reports and must download not only the report results
but all underlying data contained in the corresponding microcube to their desktops. In addition, even Web Intelli-
gence-based microcubes, which reside on the Web server box, must be replicated across the network and individually
loaded into Web server memory, along with their corresponding project universe definition, limiting the number of
cubes which can be analyzed concurrently.
Additional architectural limitations hindering Business Objects data scalability include:
• High number of uncontrolled direct connections from the desktop and the Web to the database eventually
crashing the database
• Use of generic non-optimized single-pass SQL bogging down the database
• Limited aggregate capability resulting in a high amount of data aggregating on the fly
•Limited shared caching, across the entire product set, means high number of queries running live against the
database
• Limited application server functionality
•Most data processing performed locally, which over-utilizes the desktop and grossly under-leverages the data-
base. Business Objects performs most processing on the client desktop and the Web server box with minimal
leveraging of the power of the database (e.g., particularly that processing, such as transaction-level analysis,
which is far more efficiently performed closer to the data source by the database).
8. MicroStrategy is a pure-Web architecture built from the ground up – for the Internet – and provides
the Web reporting, security, performance and Web standards necessary for scalable Web deployment.
Why is Business Objects not suitable for a broad Web-based deployment of business intelligence?
Business Objects’ lack of a pure-Web architecture severely limits Web user scalability by placing heavy loads on the
network and the Web server box. Limited true Web application server functionality and an architecture which requires
the execution of costly client/server programs on the Business Objects Web Intelligence box means extensive memory
requirements per concurrent Web user, significantly limiting Web user scalability.
Equally problematic, Business Objects requires varying amounts of client-side downloads depending on the Web
requirements and the type of Business Objects report accessed. High reliance on a heavy client plug-in for Web users
to view or modify a Business Objects desktop Document or create a Web Intelligence report means Business Objects
is limited in its ability to support Web-based enterprise BI. Any type of access – even simple view only access – of a
desktop report by a Web user requires some degree of program download to the Web browser machine. Without this
client plug-in, Web users will have limited access to Business Objects desktop reports and will have only very limited
report creation and editing capability, access to only very simple calculation types such as sum, count, min, max, and
percent only, and limited drill capabilities. In short, BI architectures that bolt-on Web front ends to legacy client/server
systems cannot scale to the necessary number of concurrent Web users.
23
9. MicroStrategy provides high performance data analysis. Why is Business Objects performance lacking?
MicroStrategy 8 provides the data scalability of a ROLAP architecture with the response times of a cube approach.
MicroStrategy 8 achieves this by dynamically optimizing performance at all levels and proactively preventing bottle-
necks from occurring at any point in the BI environment. MicroStrategy supports aggregate tables which optimize the
performance of the OLAP and Reporting application. MicroStrategy’s engine is “aggregate aware,” ensuring processing
against the most efficient tables.
While analysis within a pre-built Business Objects microcube can be reasonably fast, there are two other points where
data processing occurs; the initial loading of the microcube, and whenever analysis extends beyond the microcube
(which it often does) and all raw data must be re-retrieved and the microcube is completely reloaded. Initial microcube
loading will often require more time to build than a comparable MicroStrategy 8 query due to the non-optimized SQL
generated, the extensive raw data which must be retrieved and the inefficiency of performing data processing on the
desktop or Web server.
Business Objects’ manual aggregate awareness means there is no guarantee that the most efficient table is accessed.
With 64-bit processing, MicroStrategy can support much greater numbers of users and data sizes while improving
performance. BO cannot leverage the extra memory provided by 64-bit hardware.
10. MicroStrategy provides industrial-strength multi-level security. Does Business Objects support data level
security and what other security limitations exist with Business Objects?
MicroStrategy 8 security contains the necessary depth and breadth to allow the secured deployment of BI applications
to employees, partners, suppliers and customers through the Internet. MicroStrategy accomplishes this via the use
of privileges at the application functionality level; access control lists at the reporting object level; and security filters,
connection mapping, and support for database views at the data level. In addition, user level security is supported via
MicroStrategy’s integration with NT and LDAP while transmission level security is supported via 128-bit SSL transmis-
sion, 128-bit data encryption or double firewall configuration with no database connection on the Web server.
MicroStrategy 8’s profile-based security ensures that every part of the platform and delivery architecture is secure and
can be centrally administered. In addition, MicroStrategy’s implementation of industry-standard security measures
ensures MicroStrategy’s security model can be integrated into any existing security approach. MicroStrategy security is
fully granular to the “cell level” meaning all reporting objects and underlying data cells can be controlled at the neces-
sary level via a right mouse click.
Despite being radically revamped in Business Objects XI Release 2, Business Objects still lacks industrial-strength security.
Business Objects is still not only missing key security components, but their security architecture has serious security
flaws which jeopardize corporate assets. These flaws include limited built-in microcube security. Business Objects has
a number of fundamental security risks (e.g., heavy use of Active X and Java applets) and security weaknesses (e.g.,
limited support for existing source system security, and data level security can be bypassed).
Business Objects security is maintenance intensive because security is typically set up and maintained in multiple tools
and interfaces: Business Objects’ Central Management Console and Designer tools and in Crystal’s Business Views
Manager tools. Business Objects’ data-level security is manually implemented with hard-coded SQL WHERE clauses,
creating significant risk. These hard-coded SQL WHERE clause qualifications are manually written in Universes and Busi-
ness Views for each user against each table at each level of data analysis to fully restrict data level access. This is very
24
administrator intensive and if the necessary WHERE clause is left off even one table in the reporting environment for
a given user, unauthorized access is possible. For Web Intelligence users, microcubes, containing potentially sensitive
data, are stored on the Web server.
VI. T
op 10 Points to Consider When Migrating from the Business
Objects Version 5 and 6 to XI
Business Objects’ customers currently using versions 5 and 6 will face numerous challenges when they migrate to the XI
product line. It is important for current Business Objects’ customers and prospects to understand the level of effort and
risk given the negative impact and distraction these extensive migration efforts will have throughout the entire Business
Objects organization.
Surveys, such as The OLAP Survey 6, show that a software vendor distracted with the development, migration and
support of multiple divergent product lines is far less likely to deliver new and stable product functionality on time
and will most likely provide sub-standard quality support. Given this, Business Objects’ customers and prospects must
consider the following ten migration points:
1. Tedious Effort
All Business Objects and Crystal functionality, including Report, and underlying Universe and Business View metadata
objects, requires conversion to XI on an object-by-object basis in a rigorous sequence. Administrators must follow
a complex road map specifying the various report conversion, migration utilities, import wizards and manual
customization to apply to each object. When the process is not followed and an object is missed or not migrated in
the proper sequence the report breaks.
2. Manual Effort
Given the radically different repository file structures and security model in the XI architecture, heavy manual conversion
effort is required. Business Objects’ migration and conversion utilities “automate” a minimal percentage of the effort
and require a high degree of manual processing; the number of steps varies by product version and functionality type.
3. Extensive Rework
In addition to the manual steps on the basic functionality conversion, a high percentage of the Business Objects’
reporting environment must be completely recreated in XI including:
• All 5.X reports and metadata objects

• All locally defined report logic (e.g., user objects, functions, formulas, user defined variables, etc.)
• All customizations (via SDK, any hand-coded SQL, etc.)
• All Broadcast Agent type functionality (e.g., publications, schedules, distribution lists)
• All user and user group definitions
• All security setup (Note: The XI security model is radically different)
• All Business Query analysis
• Most Corporate Document functionality
• Most Universes with any degree of complexity (e.g., linked universes)
• Most complex Web Intelligence reports (e.g., OLAP source-based )
25
4. Not for the Risk Averse
Given XI is wholly unproven and untested in production environments, it is the risk, complexity and XI stability issues
which potentially pose the biggest challenges in converting to XI. Erroneous results and corrupted reports result if multi-
step manual processes are not followed in precise order.
5. Comprehensive Testing is Required

Given the complexity and risk, Business Objects recommends side-by-side parallel running of the 5.X and 6.X along
with XI for an extensive period. Testing is cumbersome given the amount of manual object rebuilding and includes user,
system, load/stress and performance testing. The effort is compounded given the many differences between the 5.X/6.
X architectures and the XI architectures including varying structures, models, calculation engines, user paradigms and
server processes.
6. Migrations are Time Intensive

The conversion processing is time and resource intensive, given that migration occurs one object at a time. While
Business Objects offers numerous performance tips, including suggesting that organizations minimize the number of
reports they convert, the strain on the network and database is significant resulting in the need for a fully dedicated
server and processing environment.
7. Migrating is NOT Cheap

Organizations will need to pay Business Objects an XI migration tax, yet for no additional capacity and minimal
product functionality. Customers must either have separate licensed copies of infrastructure to run both Business
Objects and Crystal content or they must upgrade at a significant cost from Business Objects Enterprise Professional to
Enterprise Premium. The biggest cost may be the opportunity cost organizations incur as they must forgo new report
development and enhancements while the migration is under way.
8. Building Migration Utilities Have Distracted Business Objects’ R&D

Creating multiple migration wizard and conversion utilities has distracted Business Objects’ R&D efforts. Every major
release since the Crystal acquisition has either been late or lacking in relevant new BI functionality.
9. Supporting Migration Efforts Have Distracted Business Objects’ Technical and Field Support
Supporting multiple migration and conversion processes has distracted Business Objects’ support efforts, resulting
in diminished support quality for all customers. The OLAP Surveys have found that for four years in a row, Business
Objects’ customers have been among the least satisfied with the quality of their technical support.
10. Minimal Upside

Business Objects XI does not include a sufficient amount of new end user functionality or back-end architecture to
justify the migration costs. The only reason to migrate is that Business Objects will soon be dropping support for versions
5 and 6. Most end user functionality has not been enhanced e.g., Business Objects XI Desktop Intelligence offers very
little additional functionality over Business Objects Desktop version 6 and some key functionality is missing in XI e.g., the
ability to publish Web reports or use stored procedures in Universes.
26
COLL-0673 1007 MicroStrategy Incorporated • 1861 International Drive McLean, VA 22102 • 703.848.8600 • www.microstrategy.com

Microstrategy vs. Business Objects: A Comparison White Paper by Microstrategy

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Microstrategy vs. Business Objects: A Comparison White Paper by Microstrategy

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

MicroStrategy vs.

A Comparison White Paper by MicroStrategy

I. Executive Summary.. . . . . . . . . .................................................................................. 5

II. MicroStrategy Perspective on the SAP Acquisition of Business Objects............................... 6

III. MicroStrategy – A Market Proven, Industrial-Strength Technology.. ................................ 10

MicroStrategy 8 Overview.. . ................................................................................ 10

Why Companies Choose MicroStrategy.. .................................................................. 10

IV. Comparison of MicroStrategy and Business Objects on Key BI Requirements.. .................... 11

V. Critical Questions to Ask When Evaluating MicroStrategy and Business Objects.................. 16

and 6 to XI.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................................................ 25

A Shakeout in the BI Market

PRODUCT CATEGORY BUSINESS OBJECTS SAP

Office Plug-ins Live Office BEx Analyzer

CPM Planning, OutlookSoft, Netweaver® BI

Business Objects and SAP appear to be a cultural mismatch on several levels:

• Applications company vs. platform company

MicroStrategy’s Commitment to Our Customers and to Business Intelligence

As an independent BI vendor, MicroStrategy’s technology will continue to be optimized to interoperate with a

Why Companies Choose MicroStrategy?

KEY BI REQUIREMENT MICROSTRATEGY 8 BUSINESS OBJECTS XI RELEASE 2

Unified BI Architecture YES NO

combine up to 10 different user interfaces

Market Proven Enterprise YES NO

Interactive WYSIWYG Web YES LIMITED

Dynamic Report YES LIMITED

Centralized Enterprise YES LIMITED

no dynamic or multi-level analysis as is required

Dynamic Enterprise Yes Limited

Robust Enterprise Reporting YES LIMITED

Report consumers are unable to edit the

Information Delivery Yes Limited

1. Define aggregate table(s).

3. All Metadata is not fully available from all products:

4. Not all functionality is available from all BO metadatas:

9. Metadata implementation differences exist

Additional architectural limitations hindering Business Objects data scalability include:

systems cannot scale to the necessary number of concurrent Web users.

• All 5.X reports and metadata objects

5. Comprehensive Testing is Required

6. Migrations are Time Intensive

7. Migrating is NOT Cheap

8. Building Migration Utilities Have Distracted Business Objects’ R&D

10. Minimal Upside

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi