We performed a comparison between Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services and Oracle OBIEE based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Reporting solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I'm very satisfied with the customer service. And usually, whenever we have any issue or details, we get to the person for the support. I'm really satisfied with the service. Within a few minutes or within a few hours, the support person will be available."
"The initial setup is easy."
"I like Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services' automated reporting feature."
"The stability of SSRS has been reliable, with minimal issues encountered during our usage."
"The tool's valuable features are its drill-down feature, graphs, and charts."
"We can create quality reports in real time."
"It is scalable."
"It is a stable solution."
"The solution is easy to use and very flexible."
"There are some great new features in the latest version."
"Ability to create our own reports."
"Can utilize SQL queries to generate reports directly."
"The main features of this solution are that it is easy to use, intuitive, and user-friendly. When I retrieve the data from the database it is in a very raw form, then when I use the Oracle Report Builder it has advanced intelligence features to allow me to view and make changes to the data easily."
"The centralized metadata model component is most valuable."
"The main features of this solution are that it is easy to use, intuitive, and user-friendly. When I retrieve the data from the database it is in a very raw form, then when I use the Oracle Report Builder it has advanced intelligence features to allow me to view and make changes to the data easily."
"Both the vertical and horizontal scalability of the solution is good. In terms of scalability, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten."
"Sometimes, we need to make sure that the configuration stays consistent across the reporting instances. They all connect to the same database. So, it shares that same backend, but the reporting services itself can also be configured. On the application level, for reporting level. And it is, based on my own experience, it is a manual effort to make sure that the reporting servers are configured the same across the environment."
"We encounter some barriers while trying to build a report."
"It doesn't have quite the flexibility of a Tableau or something like that. Many users are more comfortable with Tableau and I'm not quite sure why that is right now, but it seems to be the case."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"The setup is difficult because you have to install different servers."
"It is not easy to integrate the product with other tools in the market."
"The product could be improved by reducing the time it takes to build and deploy reports."
"We have had issues with the refresh interval since we have too many reports scheduled. Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services is also expensive."
"The platform's data visualization features need improvement."
"It is not a good product for data visualization."
"The graphical capabilities could be better. They are also cumbersome, and they are limited compared to Tableau, Power BI, or even Business Objects to a certain extent and Cognos. The error logging isn't great either. The errors that come out when you schedule aren't easy to understand. I find how they filter within a query quite cumbersome and difficult to debug if somebody else has done it. You can see as you build, and I think that's where the problem is. It doesn't lend itself to debug something. For example, if you create a formula that's quite complicated, it's not easy to understand what goes with what. It becomes spaghetti, and it's very difficult to unpick. That's really my gripe about it, and in some ways, it's too flexible. It tries to be a Jack of all trades when it's not. I think a lot of these products, if they concentrate on trying to produce your reports, then that's fine. But when they're trying to do all sorts of other things as well, then it isn't very easy. We get lots of support from Oracle, but I think the problem is that we get many invalid file operations. Nobody understands why. It can be a multitude of reasons, but no one reason could cause it. That's just one of the issues we've had in the last year. But the scope of reporting has gone through the roof over the previous 12 to 18 months. We want an end-of-life OBIEE in our environment because some of the infrastructure runs unclustered. We weren't allowed to go clustered for some reason, and we never knew why. Unfortunately, going down that route means that the platform we run it on, WebLogic, has now become non-standard within our organization. Everything's been moved off it and onto other platforms. Unfortunately, our OBIEE runs on that platform, and we're being pushed down different routes, and we don't know where we're going at the moment. Within the next two years, I don't think we'll have OBIEE in our part of the business. In the next release, I think having the capability of being able to develop and then promote to a production environment rather than having to have separate environments will help. I know that Tableau and Power BI can be created on a desktop application, and then when it's ready to go live, you can promote it."
"When a large number of queries are running at the same time, the report fails."
"Even though we have a feature to enable the physical query to be seen in the log, in case of any issues, it is challenging to debug and see or identify where is the issue. For example, we designed the OBIEE repository and deployed it into the server, and we are now accessing and creating a report. For some reason, if the report is not working as expected, it is very difficult to identify the issue. We have a feature to see the physical query that is being generated in the central OBIEE server. I feel that this feature should have been available at the repository level so that while designing the repository, we can select the presentation columns and the query it is going to create. This will avoid the additional task of deploying a feature into the server and then testing the report. It will also make the implementation process friendly if, while designing the repository, we can see: How is a feature working? Are any of the presentation columns selected? How is the query being generated? Which query is being generated? Are any joints used? What kind of joints are used? Having this kind of information will make Oracle OBIEE more powerful and developer-friendly."
"Oracle OBIEE could improve the visualizations, such as diagrams, charts, and graphical user interface. Other tools on the market have better graphical visualizations this Oracle OBIEE."
"In terms of tech support, we have our own technicians. But, we did register for their help. When we register a call, it takes time for them to respond to us."
"Oracle products have a lot of complications...Oracle has a history of not really providing great support."
More Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services is ranked 7th in Reporting with 16 reviews while Oracle OBIEE is ranked 3rd in Reporting with 154 reviews. Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services is rated 7.8, while Oracle OBIEE is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services writes "Offers useful templates but needs to improve the connectivity offered". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle OBIEE writes "A solution that is easily accessible, scalable and requires a straightforward initial setup process to get started". Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services is most compared with Microsoft Power BI, TIBCO Jaspersoft, Tableau, SAP Crystal Reports and IBM Cognos, whereas Oracle OBIEE is most compared with Microsoft Power BI, IBM Cognos, SAP BusinessObjects Business Intelligence Platform, Tableau and MicroStrategy. See our Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services vs. Oracle OBIEE report.
See our list of best Reporting vendors.
We monitor all Reporting 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.