nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Sigma XL

Bill_Worley

Hey All,

Does anyone have experience with Sigma XL? We have a customer that needs to justify buying JMP or JMP Pro vs. Sigma XL and Minitab. We have Minitab covered, but not SXL.

I went to the SXL website and their standard version appears to be Regular JMP, but only a much lighter version. Please let me know if you have done a direct comparison or if you have any experience at all with SXL.

Thanks,

Bill

Accepted answers

All comments

Peter_Hersh

Bill,

We have a customer that does there six sigma training using the sigma XL add-in to Excel. The capability is very limited even when compared to standard JMP. The main reason for the customer using sigma XL was the six sigma trainers used that package. The feedback we heard from the people who had used both is there was nothing they liked better about sigma XL when compared to JMP. If price is a key for the decision I believe sigma XL is about $250.

Pete

Bill_Worley

Thanks Pete.

Peter_Bartell

Bill: You get what you pay for. SigmaXL is cheap...beyond that, it pales in comparison to JMP, let alone JMP Pro. Years ago, when I did a cursory comparison at Kodak I also noticed some real what I'll call misleading design limitations in their training materials and functionality. For example, I remember the view of DOE was limited to full and fractional factorial designs of the 2**k or 2**(k-p) family and you'd think the DOE world ended there. Maybe it's changed? And analysis capability was also limited to things like simple main effect and two factor interaction plots and a table of parameter estimates, ANOVA table...maybe one way to twist residual plots with standard least squares. Nothing even approaching the JMP Prediction Profiler.

Bill_Worley

Thanks Peter.

Peter_Bartell

I was curious so I went out to the Sigma XL web site to take a look to see what I could learn. Pretty bare bones compared to JMP from an analytics point of view...with none of the dynamic interactivity which is the hallmark of the JMP family. The capability/feature list for DOE is below. I was close in my evaluation in my earlier reply. Looks like only 2**k, 2**(k-p), Plackett-Burman, and in the response surface family, central composite and Box Behnken designs. Doesn't appear Sigma XL goes anywhere near optimal DOE. Appears response surface designs are limited to 5 factors? Wonder why the designers put that constraint in place?