We performed a comparison between Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog and SAS Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Metadata Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog is it provides clients with a full view of the enterprise data assets. For example, how many data assets they have and who owns them."
"It can automatically connect or associate business terms with various options, providing flexibility beyond general capabilities."
"I like EDC's self-service capabilities. You can put the catalog on the intranet inside the organization, so users can search for something. People in the research world have specialized systems, and you might find data from various places that sound similar."
"We can scan anything."
"The solution scales well."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to extract metadata from various sources- be it an old SaaS application or the latest cloud application."
"Multifeatured and easily scalable data catalog, with good data domain discovery and data profiling features."
"I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"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 feature is you have native access to the external databases."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ease of access to the data in those databases."
"The UX and UI of the solution are areas with certain shortcomings where improvements can be made in the future."
"It is more complicated to extract data using the product compared to Visio. The system could display the details on the screen."
"This solution is hard to set up and its interface is not user-friendly. It's also not as stable, and the technical support takes a lot of time to solve simple problems."
"Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog could improve by having a much better user interface. It is not user-friendly."
"The scalability is tough."
"The model is somewhat flexible. There are certain aspects of the model that are not as flexible as we would like. It doesn't do certain things to a great level of depth. So, in situations where we want to drill in to do something specific, we have to essentially copy that data into our own structures in order to add that additional layer of flexibility."
"Interoperability is one area where EDC has room for improvement. It was challenging when the faculty took over the data world and had specific vendors they wanted to use, and some were not particularly open platforms."
"IEDC can improve the comparison of lineages."
"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."
"The pricing model needs to be reconsidered and adjusted."
"The solution can provide access to the newer databases that come out sooner."
More Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog Pricing and Cost Advice →
Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog is ranked 1st in Metadata Management with 13 reviews while SAS Access is ranked 42nd in Data Integration with 3 reviews. Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog is rated 7.6, while SAS Access is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog writes "Great metadata management with more visibility and great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAS Access writes "The solution is stable, scalable, and flexible". Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog is most compared with Alation Data Catalog, Collibra Catalog, AWS Glue, Informatica PowerCenter and Denodo, whereas SAS Access is most compared with Delphix, SSIS, Zapier and Toad Data Point. See our Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog vs. SAS Access report.
We monitor all Metadata Management 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.
