We performed a comparison between Informatica PowerCenter and SAS Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are the dynamic reading of the file metadata profile, and the ability to define business rules that are used to verify and validate the uploaded files."
"I found the map links, work links, and workflows valuable. They are important features."
"What I like the most is that we have to deal with less while writing the queries."
"It provides monitoring and we can therefore be aware of what is happening when we are handling jobs."
"In the end, you have structured, proper data for use in an integrated BI solution."
"The most valuable features are the metadata repository and the data warehouse application console."
"UI-based ability to create data mapping."
"I would recommend that others considering the solution go ahead and use it for any batch and high volume loads with complex transactions."
"The most valuable feature is you have native access to the external databases."
"The most valuable part of SAS/ACCESS is what it is made for: connecting to remote systems that are not part of your physical SAS environment."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ease of access to the data in those databases."
"Its scalability can be improved. It is not scalable."
"Informatica PowerCenter could improve on the documentation for the implementation. The documents provided are not very good for a new user."
"The UI is outdated and old-fashioned, at least in our current version. Also, we have experienced some stability issues with the Workflow Monitor application."
"It should be more cloud-centric than on-prem-centric."
"I found it is kind of weird that not all of the mapping changes are treated as true changes."
"Some of the conversions are done inside the product. We use work tables that are created by the engine itself, but the names of the work tables are very long, and they don't have any meaning, which makes it a bit difficult to understand and follow exactly what is happening inside."
"The developer tool documentation can be enhanced with a more clear explanation of each utility, accompanied by relevant examples, so that developers are able to create programs with ease."
"The solution's commercial cost is very high. Other open-source tools can do the tool's functions for free. The world is moving to the cloud, but the solution hasn't updated its drivers. I presume that its downfall will start soon. The tool is trying to cross-sell or upsell without helping customers derive benefits from the existing products. They have multiple tools and licenses. It is better to bring the smaller tools in one umbrella."
"The pricing model needs to be reconsidered and adjusted."
"The solution can provide access to the newer databases that come out sooner."
"I can't really recall any missing feature or general improvement that is needed. We don't really add too many new kinds of databases and therefore our needs are already met."
Informatica PowerCenter is ranked 3rd in Data Integration with 78 reviews while SAS Access is ranked 42nd in Data Integration with 3 reviews. Informatica PowerCenter is rated 8.0, while SAS Access is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Informatica PowerCenter writes "Stable, provides good support, and integrating it with other systems is very fast, but its pricing is expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAS Access writes "The solution is stable, scalable, and flexible". Informatica PowerCenter is most compared with Informatica Cloud Data Integration, Azure Data Factory, SSIS, Databricks and AWS Glue, whereas SAS Access is most compared with Toad Data Point and Delphix. See our Informatica PowerCenter vs. SAS Access report.
See our list of best Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.