SAP Crystal Reports Reviews

It is being used for reporting purpose. 

It is an user-friendly solution. 

The financing part needs improvement. 

I have been using the solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

It is a scalable solution. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We pay fifteen hundred dollars as licensing fee. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

We are a software development company and we have a lot of experience with different tools, including SAP Crystal Reports.

This product is one that we have implemented in different hospitals. We have stopped using it at times, but some clients still opt to use it. It is something that we are trying to replace with a mini dashboard for our clients, giving them a nicer way to visualize data.

One of our clients uses it for extracting data from the administrative system and generating relevant administrative reports. In cases like this, we develop reports for them.

The most valuable feature is that from a user's point of view, it is easy to use and requires just a simple click to generate a report.

It has the ability to export to different formats including Excel and PDF, so there is value there when you consider that it's a nice report that can be accessed on different platforms.

This was a good platform when it first came out but right now, it has become a complicated behemoth. These days, things are a little more dynamic and you really need a platform where you can change fast, and Crystal Reports is not it. This is an enterprise solution and there is no innovation there. The only innovation comes through a company that develops reports, such as us. A real improvement would be a simpler system that allows users to play with the visualization without needing specialized skills and code.

You shouldn't need a specialized developer just to code a Crystal Report. Ideally, a general-purpose or front-end developer, which is more cost-effective, should be able to do it.

A lot of times, what happens is that developers reuse or repurpose their domain model to use that to pull the data from a database. I think the main model that they use for the web application, the database model, and then use that to run the reports because they don't want to rewrite the code. This means that those entity models they have are too normalized for the crystal reports. Then, it becomes a bit of a mismatch where they have to change those entities and create new ones. Reporting is different than something like getting data from a web application and we really care about the transactions, which means that you always have to denormalize the data. What I've seen a lot of times is that developers kind of get stuck in this mismatch and they have to recode something. Or, they just drop what they did and do it from scratch, remapping the tables or creating new entities. This is a problem because if you promise somebody a report, only to later realize that it needs to be re-coded, it takes additional time. It becomes even more complicated when you need to re-create the business logic.

Because the users can export data to Excel or a PDF, it sometimes leads to data leakage and can create privacy issues. 

We have been working with Crystal Reports since 2004.

If you're running the Crystal Reports server then you can control it much better. For example, when developers use the web application it means that they don't think about the extra memory that the server is going to require to run these reports. So, you get issues when you run a heap memory and things like that because the report just bootstraps lots of this information, all of the data.

With the infrastructure having to run the report, it might request a lot of memory, especially if you have a lot of users. This is something that can kill your server. That's where you want to offload it to a specialized server, such as a Crystal Report server or a Jasper server. These serve and compile the reports for you. This is why there is a push for companies to get these specialized servers.

Given that you have options for both on-premises and cloud, I would say that it is scalable. They are thinking about these things, although I would say that it is a bit too late.

We have an enterprise license, so we are eligible for technical support. When we have gotten feedback for a client, it has taken time. The other problem is that because it's a closed system, they don't fix bugs right away. Just because an incident is reported and logged, doesn't mean that it will be fixed anytime soon. This means that in the interim, you have to find a workaround for the problem.

We use a variety of different approaches for giving clients the data that they want to see. The first step is understanding what the client need is. If it is just a basic report that they don't want to change often, then we can get away with something static. Most of the time, we have to put in a few variables, or parameters.

Because Crystal Reports costs a lot of money, is a specialized skill, and isn't necessarily better, we try to focus on the data that they need and put it on a dashboard instead. There is a spectrum of things to consider when deciding on the suitability of any particular solution.

When we go back and speak with clients, a lot of the time we find that they don't really need Crystal Reports. They need something that is a canned report that they can go back and look at all the time. If that's the case then you can get a simple HTML5 page, which is much faster to develop and easier to maintain. Ultimately, it depends on the client's use cases.

The difficulty of the initial setup depends on your skillset, and I would say that it is somewhere between straightforward and complex. Getting it going within your web application takes some time for things such as getting the proper JAR files.

The server can deliver the reports to you, but you still have to integrate it with your database. This is something that can be time-consuming.

This product costs a lot of money.

At this point, I would just go with something that is matched with Power BI. It's coming from the Microsoft world, and the users will be comfortable with it.

I would say that its suitability depends on who you speak with. For a front-end developer, they are not going to like Crystal Reports. On the other hand, if you're a back-end developer and you understand the architecture then you're going to be okay with it. Again, it really depends on the client's use cases, the skillset, and the resources.

If your organization does not have many users, the traffic is low, and doesn't have any compliance issues, then you can get away with open-source solutions. They are going to be much faster to implement, easier to deploy, easier to manage, and have a low overhead. With the Google Chart Library, for example, you have all of the charts that you need.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We have several dashboards that we use, some of which are for revenue. We have an SQL server as a data warehouse and the other division is using HANA for the backend database. 

I find Crystal Reports very easy to use, even for a non-technical person.

The drag-and-drop capability is good.

It is easy to change between different file types.

The reports scheduler is helpful.

It provides a lot of flexibility.

There could be improvements made to the analytics capabilities.

Crystal Reports could be more graphical.

Management wants to be able to see everything on one page.

I have been using Crystal Reports for more than 15 years, since the first version that was released.

This is a stable solution and we have not experienced any issues.

This product is easy to scale.

There are other divisions and some of our users have rights to create their own reports. I am not able to say how many users we have in total, but with the BI team and the developers, we have twenty users.

For an enterprise, you can have many users for SAP.

Most of the users are using it daily, to check their dashboards. We plan to continue using this solution as most of our dashboards are sitting on the SAP.

In my division, we have not contacted technical support, but it's possible that some of the other divisions have.

My guess is that the support is good.

I used Crystal Reports when it was incorporated with Visual Basic. It has now been separated, which makes it easier.

We also use Microsoft Power BI, which allows you to use graphs and filtering on one page. You can also see the different objects on one page. It is more on the graphical side.

They still have the same functionality where you can drill down to the lowest level, depending on the database schema.

The initial setup straightforward and it's easy to setup.

Initially, I did the deployment myself, although we now have a BI team to do this for us. It is a specific department that does all of the setups for us.

We have considered migrating to another platform but there are so many available.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to learn the dimensions that are needed for the reports. There are some measures or formulas that are needed, and you have to organize your templates. With practice, it becomes easy to use.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

• Tabular reporting, primarily just data and tables, no charts
• Specific highlighting/formatting.

I've used it for a long time, and familiarity with the product allows for faster delivery.

• Pixel-perfect formatting
• It's extremely customizable.

Charting capabilities are incomplete relative to competitors.

The most valuable feature is the ability to create reports easily. End users and non-technical users can learn the product with ease.

Crystal Reports enables end users to create reports. This in turn, enables business analysts to perform analytics without interaction from our IT teams.

From our experience with it, we would like the ability to change reports en masse in case of backend changes. It would also be nice if it enabled object orientation.

I've used it for two years.

I've had no issues with deploying it.

There have been no issues with its performance.

It's scaled for our needs.

We've had very good customer support.

Technical support has been very good.

We worked with other solutions concurrently. SSRS was another reporting solution we used.

Initial setup needed to be performed by an IT administrator. Data connectivity was also a function reserved for IT.

The solution was implemented in-house using our local system admin.

Our ROI with the solution was being able to jump onto loans that were delinquent before they became junk loans.

This is a good product with good visuals.

Eliminate the reserved space in Page Footer section.

Find an easier way to utilize the Database > Links feature, or allow the ability to alter the selection SQL. Crystal Reports makes too many assumptions, causing odd results, which can sometimes be corrected by altering the SQL or changing the links (providing you understand the link options).

Since 2011.

I did not encounter any deployment, stability or scalability issues.

I was not part of the search/decision making process. I don’t know why the organization’s developers/decision makers chose this product to present their reports. They continue to use it, so it must be satisfying their needs.

I have not yet used other products, so I have nothing to compare against.

The product is easy to learn for the basics. However, some features are difficult to learn and use (e.g., cross-tab tables). Documentation is minimal.

The product makes assumptions with table/view/stored procedure links, which can create unpredictable results.

The option settings (especially font settings) are global. I work with many customers who use different fonts and sizes. It is annoying to have to reset the option settings based on which client report I’m working.

The page footer reserves space; if you use a page footer on only the first page, it wastes real estate on subsequent pages.

The ease of making simple reports. The facts that many people use it, hence a lot of expertise can be found on the internet and trainings are available.

I develop reports for customers, for an ERP system that collects a lot of data, but has very few standard reports. Customers use the reports for making decisions and negotiations.

• Sub-reports in sub-reports
• Making graphs is very cumbersome
• Exporting to Excel
• Using Stored procedures
• Complex SQL Queries

I've used Crystal Reports in general for about 20 years, and v2008 for about six years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

We have had no issues with the stability.

We haven't needed to scale it.

I wasn't aware of there being any.

It's very straightforward.

I have only installed the developer version, and that can anyone do with it’s eyes closed.

The training of users can be more expensive. User training can take two to five days, and in addition, the user needs to understand the database, the tables, and where to get the data.

The training of users can be more expensive. User taining can take two to five days, and in addition, the user needs to understand the database, the tables, and where to get the data.

It does what it does have to do, but seems development has stuck for several years now. Many things are not possible either. Complex queries are impossible, you need to make SQL statements. Sub report in a sub report is impossible.