Talk:Comparison of specialized computer-aided audit tools

This article was nominated for deletion on 29 January 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to Computer-aided audit tools.

Other stuff to compare/consider

As the comparison tables can help in comparing the tools there are other factors to consider if/when you want to compare the tools. These are:

Price: What's the license price of the product. What's the price for maintenance.
Level of support: To what level of support is provided by vendor. Can you submit problem reports? Is a forum available in where you can ask questions?
Frequency of releases: How often is the product upgraded?
Ease of use: How easy is it to use the product? How much training is required before you can use it? This can both in relation to ease of use in preparing data, e.g. import, join, merge and clean-up data features, or in relation to easy of use of analysis features.
Performance: How well does the product perform, in e.g. browsing (querying) through thousands of transactions.
Limitations: Does the product have any limitations, in e.g. table/file sizes?
Other requirements: Does the product require special stuff to be installed for being able to run? E.g. requiring Microsoft Excel to run.
Availability of training: Are there training available for you so that you can learn about how to use the product? Self-study, exercises, third party course etc.
API or Scripting ability: Does the product offer scripting ability or an API so that you yourself can extend the product?

Some of these points could be compared in the article page. Misuo (talk) 13:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate tools for inclusion

Please see the list of Computer-aided audit tools. Additional candidates:

Arbutus Fraud Detection from Arbutus Software, http://www.arbutussoftware.com/products/fraud-detection/
CFG from Cash Flow Guardian, http://www.cashflowguardian.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misuo (talk • contribs) 07:09, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pure Advertising

I came here as a result of a linkin post. A post was made saying that this article should be consulted when looking at CAATS. The person who made the post is a project development manager with ESKORT and has a first name begining with MI and a last name begining with SOU---I have no doubt that user:MISOU who created this page is that user. This article is basically intended to be a comparison between the top dog in the CAATS field ACL with an unknown product. The article does not contain the other big names in the field and includes incomplete information on ACL; but goes into detail on a small company trying to gain a foothold in the field. In essence, imagine an article comparing Computer models. The article lists IBM and a small computer manufacturer, but omits HP, Dell, Apple, and Acer. The fact that it is being used elsewhere as promotion is further grounds for concern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.254.130.235 (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're free to add the other tools to the comparison tables to improve the comparisons. Misuo (talk) 07:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The intention with the page is not advertising nor promotion, but objective comparison for the good of the community so that people interested in these tools have something to compare with. It's like any other comparison table on Wikipedia. Examples like Comparison of web browsers or Comparison of graphics file formats. Misuo (talk) 07:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this page weren't advertising, I'd expect to see some mention of non-commercial data analytic tools for auditing, such as Picalo. 193.105.48.21 (talk) 08:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]