84

Which of Crystal Reports and SSRS (SQL Server Reporting Services) is better to use?

Peter Mortensen
  • 28,342
  • 21
  • 95
  • 123
RBS
  • 3,481
  • 11
  • 31
  • 32

18 Answers18

141

On the one-hand, Crystal Reports is a steaming pile of expensive and overhyped donkey poo, and on the other hand SSRS actually fulfils all the promises that CR marketing makes - and it's free.

My contempt for CR stems from many years of being obliged to use the horrible thing. There's really no point in detailing the utter odiousness of CR when I can give you references like Clubbing the Crystal Dodo or Crystal Reports Sucks Donkey Dork (not as funny but rather more literate and substantiated with technical details).

Free?! Yup. You don't even have to buy MS SQL Server to get it - you can install SQL Express with Advanced Services. This is available as a download that includes SQL Server Reporting Services. While SQL Express is limited in the number of concurrent users it can support, the following observations are salient:

  • The licence for SSRS obtained as part of SQL Express only requires that it be deployed as part of SQL Express. There is nothing forbidding connection to other data sources or requiring that a report obtain data from SQL Server.

  • The abovementioned version of SSRS has no intrinsic restrictions on user connections. All limitations are imposed on the SQL Express database engine.

  • SSRS uses ADO.NET, which includes, out of the box, drivers for Oracle, Jet (Access), OLEDB and ODBC

Thus you can connect the free version of SSRS to any back-end to which you can connect ADO.NET, which includes (for example) MySQL. I am told by Rory in a comment below that this is "not supported". That's true but I can't find anything in the licence that forbids it and while the drivers are not supplied by SSExpress they certainly are supplied by most versions of Visual Studio and you can ship them in your setup kit. This may not be an expressly supported configuration but so what? Even if you did have a full MSSQL licence it would be asking a bit much to expect Microsoft to help you talk to some third party database (not to mention a bit weird).

I use SSRS extensively at work both for inward facing reports and for outward facing reports embedded in ASP.NET applications that provide bureau services to large numbers of paying customers. In our case it happens that the backing store is a licensed copy of Microsoft SQL Server 2008, but this is incidental to the technical merits of our reporting solution.

There is a long list of capabilities that Crystal Reports claims to support but which either don't work or which require a staggeringly expensive licence if you want more than five users. You can't even trust CR to do SQL correctly. SELECT COUNT(*) FROM SOMETABLE WHERE 1=0 should produce a result of zero but it it produces one. The built-in query engine is defective, and a team that screws up something a bunch of amateurs can do for free (eg MySQL) has no hope of getting anything you'd describe as performance out of their code.

And they don't. The evil thing leaks memory like a bucket with no bottom, and if you use SQL profiling tools you will find it is spectacularly inefficient.

As for the alleged support, I can personally attest that dialog resize bugs have gone uncorrected for decades after they were first publicly documented. If you get out your credit card and pay the extortionate ransoms demanded (I too would want handsome pay to support such a horror) you will find yourself talking to someone who claims his name is David, but inexplicably pronounces it "Dah-feet", and who doesn't even understand your question, much less have an answer.

The SSRS support situation is fairly similar, but it actually works so you don't really need much.

SSRS, on the other hand, does everything that CR claims to. It is not without bugs, but they are delightfully few, and they seldom survive more than one release cycle.

The SSRS designer UI is hosted within the Visual Studio IDE. It is attractively presented in typical Microsoft style, but more than this it is quite well thought out, incorporating several simple but fundamental departures from traditional report designers. For example, to present tabular data you define a table rather than fiddling about with individual text boxes. As a result you don't have to screw around trying to line them up, and putting borders on them is a trivial stylesheet exercise.

SSRS actually does all the things CR claims to, it's inexpensive, there is extensive reliable technical documentation, it's designed to be extended (also documented) and you can connect it to anything for which you can get an ODBC driver. This is a no brainer.

Some shortcomings of SSRS

  • It is not obvious how to bind fields in page headers and footers.
  • It is not possible (so far as I know) to position relative to the bottom of a page. This is a genuine problem for certain types of report, and one for which I can think of no workaround.
  • There's no support for expando horizontal rollups in cross-tabulations.
  • There's no direct support for report headers and footers. Use Rectangle objects at top and bottom of the report layout, with pagebreaking properties set appropriately. Or use subreports. The people who complain about this obviously haven't tried very hard.
  • Lack of support for overlapping group intervals (the CR grouping system can do this) UPDATE SSRS 2008 R2 now supports this. It's buried in the grouping edit dialog. Look up "group variables" and read this.

It actually looks like overlapping groups can be done with SSRS2005 too, although I never knew that. I wonder did anyone ever crack the bottom-relative positioning issue?

Peter Wone
  • 15,594
  • 12
  • 74
  • 106
  • 6
    So, Peter...you're actually not sure about your position then?! ;-) Actually, I agree wholeheartedly! – AR. Oct 10 '08 at 20:49
  • 1
    lol @ Clubbing the Crystal Dodo. – Pulsehead Oct 21 '08 at 18:12
  • 3
    Agree - but note that your sample SQL - SELECT COUNT(*) FROM SOMETABLE WHERE 1=0 - is not a good example, as this is SHOULD return a single row, with a single field - the value of COUNT(*), which should be exactly 0 - this must always be returned. – AviD Feb 23 '09 at 07:28
  • 15
    "SELECT COUNT(*) FROM SOMETABLE WHERE 1=0" should return one row, with one column, the vaue therein being 0. The value it returns in that cell is 1, which is incorrect. This is a bug, and it is profound. – Peter Wone Feb 24 '09 at 00:19
  • 2
    fwiw - When using SSRS with SQL Express it is NOT allowed/supported to connect to datasources other than SQL Server instances on the same machine (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc281020.aspx and http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms365166%28SQL.90%29.aspx), so if you're planning to use SQL Express to get around licensing it'd be best to check closely. – Rory May 06 '10 at 18:48
  • 3
    What do you mean with "a bunch of amateurs" ??? – armonge Dec 25 '10 at 04:56
  • 6
    By "a bunch of amateurs" I meant a group of people acting without remuneration. By definition, a person who performs a service without the expectation of payment is an amateur. Olympic athletes are amateurs. – Peter Wone Apr 29 '11 at 05:55
  • 2
    This is one of the best responses I have read in awhile. My company just switched to SSRS for all new customer reports, and it is so much easier. It makes Crystal Reports look positively stupid by comparison. We spend a lot of time creating customized reports for customers and we have found we can create, edit, and deploy reports much faster. – Jason Rae Sep 28 '11 at 21:18
  • 1
    Great response. Not only did a learn a good bit about how SSRS compares to CR, I also realized the actual definition of amateur, which is not exactly what I used to think it was :) – Chrysalis Feb 05 '14 at 16:16
  • @PeterWone - Although SSRS is not amazing either, I wonder if the team behind crystal reports was on crystal meth. Perhaps, that is where the inspiration comes from. – Steam Apr 06 '14 at 07:49
  • Also, I recently saw `SAP Data Services` and compared it to SSIS. SAP DS is an unintuitive piece of junk. Perhaps SAP itself is the dodo and CR, DS etc. are its slothful offspring. – Steam Apr 06 '14 at 07:54
20

I've been using Crystal report till version 10 and was always doing stuff i wanted successfully along with ASP.NET applications. Its output on web is really good like WYSIWYG and exports to Excel and PDF are also accurate. Printing is also marvellously correct.

Recently, i've been working on SSRS 2005 for around an year and have been living to witness so many lackings that must have been provided out-of-the-box too. SSRS web output varies greatly with different browsers and diff resolutions and would easily make a developer sick. Moreover, the scrolling issues with report viewer would make an end-user mad quite early as it is based on HTML using an IFRAME. (Note: Crystal 13 uses an IFRAME in the web-viewer which suffers from sporadic text-wrapping and overlapping issues). The exports are not good at all. You cannot align images left or center in cells and cannot specify background colors for images. You cannot center align complete report body. For possibility, i've played with the rendered HTML for hours and figured out exact replacements to make that works, but these simple fixes were not known to SSRS developers i guess because probably, they never used SSRS for themselves.

Further, in web applications, you need to bear the bad UI for parameters out-of-the-box. I have simply removed it completely and the cost of creating it in ASPX pages made me think to design tabular reports in DataGrids instead using ObjectDataSource and database pagination technique. You cannot layout the parameters to your needs. Bugs in paramters sections postsback complete reports without any changes. Paging with grouping works with a trick, but than sorting fails on complete dataset. For every bit of medium to advanced level of UI requirement, SSRS costs so much of time figuring out that it is simply not possible. As there are less of SSRS users, online community has no good solutions for simple problems. Not to forget the good side of SSRS is its deployment, notifications built-in, caching and configuration side, but no UI to win.

BOTTOMLINE is that i've seen SSRS frustating you just due to the nonresponsiveness of Microsoft Support team when they have to say 'sorry! not now' after a month. SSRS 2008 also doesn't have many of these issues fixed rightaway. Moreover, moving to SSRS' 08 means a complete migration of back-end platforms as well. Keeping the equation in mind that the more you use a software, the more it gets mature over time, Crystal is anyways a much better choice because, SSRS soon accumulates costs for fixing their bugs by yourselve.

sparebytes
  • 9,818
  • 2
  • 18
  • 29
  • 2
    +1 for presenting the only credible counterargument I have seen so far. I should point out that "I don't know how to make it do X" is not the same as "It can't do X". Personally I think the Microsoft support is better than the CR support. – Peter Wone Oct 18 '09 at 11:57
  • 3
    tl;dr (needs formatting) – g t Aug 02 '10 at 15:15
  • 2
    Have you tried SSRS 2012 to give us an up to date review? – Arvand Jul 16 '12 at 12:39
  • 2
    /me ponders whether Talha may be part of the CR support team. – Lynn Crumbling Jul 08 '13 at 15:06
  • @Arvand I believe that if one looks closely at SSRS 2012 they will find it to be almost completely unchanged from SSRS 2008. This fact has not been a positive discovery for a project I have been working on. – David Tansey Feb 05 '14 at 21:35
  • Not sure if the online community for SSRS is small. – Steam Apr 06 '14 at 08:01
15

You can deploy an app using Reporting Services by including 3 DLL files. That's a huge benefit. (Note--you have to get one of the 3 DLL files from the GAC.)

With Crystal Reports, you have to install the runtime on each machine that will run the application (either a website or client app).

Reporting Services has all of the features most people need, and the deployment is MUCH easier. I will never user Crystal Reports unless I have to.

Jim
  • 10,765
  • 17
  • 74
  • 114
  • The documentation of report service is better then CR – Cheung Mar 24 '11 at 15:36
  • 1
    "With Crystal Reports, you have to install the runtime on each machine that will run the application (either a website or client app)." - do you mean that if im a web user and want to see CR so i have to install some softs ??? – Royi Namir Aug 17 '11 at 06:41
  • This answer refers to client-side reporting, I guess – surfen Jan 02 '12 at 21:37
15

Since this thread has popped back open, I'll add my two cents. I had to use Crystal for about three years during the version 7 and 8 days. I hated every minute of it. I've seen a little bit of the newer versions and still don't like it.

I dislike it so much that it pains me to say this: from my experience Crystal's better suited than SSRS for complex reports. A coworker and I tried desperately to get a moderately complex report layout to work in SSRS and gave up. My impression of the product -- just my opinion, mind you -- is that it's not quite ready for prime time.

Crystal will make you hate your life and look for another job, but there's a reason it's so pervasive: it works.

John M Gant
  • 17,902
  • 17
  • 59
  • 82
  • 1
    +1 for clarifying the most important reason which is not technical advantage but the pain of working with Crystal Reports. – queen3 Jan 24 '10 at 16:12
14

Reporting Services is much better in my experience. It is a better environment, but best of all the connections (data sources) are separate from the report and can be shared. This makes for much simpler deployment between environments.

Carlton Jenke
  • 2,897
  • 3
  • 24
  • 29
8

I've used both, I'll add a couple of points to what's already been said:

  • For simple stuff, I'd recommend SSRS by default. Crystal is a bit bloated and quirky.

  • Crystal can easily export to MS Word format (.doc). Customers want this pretty often in my experience.

  • If formatting is important, Crystal may be better. For example, SSRS reports can't have more than one type of text in a single text box. Meaning that you can't have, say, a comment at the top of the report that has both italics and normal text. Crystal can do this:

Note: This report contains data from start date to end date inclusive of those dates.

SRSS can't (without multiple overlapping textboxes). I once had a 20 page word document given to me, to be converted to a report with data for the dozen or so graphs and tables in it. I started out in SSRS, but realised that in Crystal I could just copy and paste the hardcoded bits of the report straight from word, with coloured headings and all, and saved days of work. So Crystal does have a better "designer" in many respects.

Update:
Apparently both of these issues have been fixed in the current SRSS. Anyone care to comment further on this?

MGOwen
  • 5,951
  • 12
  • 51
  • 64
  • 3
    This comment is a bit misinformative or outdated. SSRS, at least 2008, can export to DOC, and can have formatting inside text boxes (it can even do HTML there). – queen3 Jan 24 '10 at 15:17
  • "without multiple overlapping textboxes",in my language(Persian, RTL) i should use one textbox per word! WTF? – Behrooz Apr 03 '10 at 18:38
  • There's no kind way to say this, so I'll just be blunt. People don't create tools because you need them, they do it to make money. RTL languages haven't been commercially important for three hundred years. – Peter Wone Apr 29 '11 at 06:03
4

I agree with @Carlton partly for the reasons he describes. I also think that reporting services is a more mature product (even though Crystal Reports has been around longer). The Test and deploy model is pretty hearty, and the built-in ability to track report usage is very helpful.

I also find it much easier to design reports in Reporting Services - Microsoft has learned how to build a good IDE, whereas the Crystal IDE has always seemed like an after thought (though that's better than an afterbirth, which is what it used to be).

Edit: Additional thoughts I also think that in a Windows shop, SSRS offers all kinds of sweet integrations with the OS and SQL Server. You can rely on SQL assemblies for built-in code reuse fairly easily in SSRS, and the integration with the Active Directory security model makes securing your reports very easy.

Community
  • 1
  • 1
cori
  • 8,159
  • 7
  • 40
  • 77
4

Man...my company has sooo many crystal reports...and the company before that had lots too. From version 8.5 to 11.5. They kind of already have their foot in the door so to speak. I think the CrystalReportViewer is a steaming piece of crap but it does work(for the most part).

After reading some of these answers, I'm switching to SSRS for my next reporting project! The writing is on the wall...MS will drop Crystal from VS and replace with SSRS. The only thing that's going to suck is when MS starts charging for it.

EDIT: Messing around with SSRS today and it looks quite promising. I must say the designer is taking some getting used to...CR Designer has it beat in ease of use. You can tell this is designed for programmers where as CR is geared toward report designers.

EDIT2: SSRS really fails to meet my reporting needs. Designing reports sucks when you want to preview and no parameter prompting available for standalone. Is there a better way to design them...preferably not in VS?

dotjoe
  • 24,002
  • 5
  • 60
  • 72
  • They will never charge for RS per se, but they have always charged for SQL Server and will continue to do so. This is just another compelling reason to use SQL Server. – adolf garlic Apr 17 '09 at 14:27
  • just another way to get locked into sql server! – dotjoe Apr 17 '09 at 14:49
  • While designing your reports you can default your parameters to useful values – cjk Apr 17 '09 at 15:04
  • But, how to run the report while designing? – dotjoe Apr 17 '09 at 16:07
  • 1
    Dotjoe: Well considering there are only 2 choices of databases out there (Oracle and SQL Server) Which solution would you prefer to get locked in to? If money is no object, then I'd go with Oracle, if not then SQL Server. – adolf garlic May 14 '09 at 06:30
  • Given that .DATA files are created whenever you run the report in VS.net, I'd have thought there is a way of previewing the report based on these (without the need for a db). [.DATA files are caches of the data based on params selected] – adolf garlic May 14 '09 at 06:31
  • @adolf - I just want to get locked into the solution that makes it easiest for me to design a report. :) If it was my decision, I'd be using postgresql and some open source reporting tool. I admit to not playing with the reporting services much longer than a couple days. Is their an addon to design the report in ssms? I really dislike report design in VS. – dotjoe May 14 '09 at 13:45
  • 1
    I tend to agree with most of your sentiments here and history here. If you get used to using Crystal Reports it's not all that bad, but does have it's flaws. Crystal can be tedious, but it does serve its purpose well. SSRS is another option, but I don't find it vastly superior. SSRS is probably better from a programming standpoint, but not necessarily to solve the business's data needs. I think it's a much better solution for business users to use to write there own reports than SSRS (using predefined data views). – Dusty Apr 21 '11 at 02:17
3

I wonder why no-one mentioned one big issue with CR - that it just fails in source control or team environment. Correct me if I am wrong but I really looked very hard for any report diff tools. There's one (released about year ago) but it just doesn't do well - not because it's bad but (I guess) because CR just don't expose report structure correctly or something... I tried to export .rpt to XML but it's clunky and wrong. I even tried to write my own .rpt comparer.

It's not about team development only; even if there's single developer it's a nightmare to maintain reports versions, and if your customer decided to add few things or to change few colors, you're now cursed to track every single textbox since there's absolutely no way to find out the changes.

RDL format is much more clean and open. And this can be a pretty major advantage.

queen3
  • 14,883
  • 8
  • 54
  • 114
  • I never thought about that. But in my experience shops that use CR typically lack amenities like staged release management and the associated tooling. – Peter Wone Jun 12 '11 at 03:30
  • Right, and the fact that you put the equal sign between such shops and CR tells even more ;-) – queen3 Jun 15 '11 at 14:52
  • +1: Excellent point. It really forces the committer to write PERFECT logs about exactly what they changed; I think most SC systems will treat them as binary, which means no merging. I would be *really* nice if the next rev of CR supported a text-based format. – Lynn Crumbling Jul 08 '13 at 15:17
3

Did you think about an alternative? If you want to use the features of Crystal Reports but don't want to pay so much for it you could have a look at Crystal-Clear which is an Java based reporting tool supporting Crystal Reports templates too. It comes with a GUI-designer and data sources are also configurable per system. (Almost ODBC-like, you just set a name for the connection and the connection is configured on the system.)

reallyinsane
  • 1,082
  • 9
  • 8
2

I have worked with both CR and SSRS and this what i found.

Crystal Reports runs in its own memory while SSRS runs in the limited SQL Server memory.

Crystal report is way too expensive. Recently they have slashed their price to 250$ i think as a response to SSRS 2008 release.

SSRS is free.

The biggest reason why Crystal report thrives :

You can design 80% of reports in a project using SSRS. But for the remaining 20% you have to use some other reporting tool. These 20% reports are used by none other than top level managers , directors & CEO. Their requirement can never be undermined and CR does a wonderfull job there.

Crystal report is still COM based. which is a pain in the a**.

Crystal report is not lacking capabilities or features. It is the work horse of SAP. But lot of its classes are protected and dont provide access to programmers. This is by intention. The SAP people are so greedy they want to keep every feature under control and charge extra fortune for exposing the claases and objects to the developers under special license arrangement. Just debug and quick watch the ReportDocument object in VS you will know inspite of everything available in the object you can hardly use them in your code !!

As far as GUI & CSS issues are concerned expecting a COM object which is designed for precision printing , to render correctly in every browser is a moot point as even a simple div renders differently in different browsers.

I have been working with Crystal reports since 7 years and cursing it all the time while actively exploring all other alternatives. But i am yet to come across something as flexible as Cystal Report. For bulk of the work SSRS is good. But for Dashboards , Complex Reports with subreports, Balance sheets, trial balances i shall never waste my time in SSRS.

Just try a Google Trend search on Crystal Report. It has been steadily declining since last 6 years. surely the future does not look good for CR.

But Hey ! MS, SAP and ORACLE still endorse Crystal Report at the core of their applications !! and no BI product comes cheap.

Deb
  • 981
  • 11
  • 39
  • 1
    I find this an astonishing statement, but your response as a whole is literate and thoughtful so rather than laugh it off I'll ask the question. What sort of report would be beyond the capabilities of SSRS that wouldn't *also* be far beyond the famously limited technical ability of "top level managers , directors & CEO"? – Peter Wone Apr 25 '12 at 23:29
  • Several reports i can tell but that will be beyond the scope of this discussion. Ever tried using arrays ? Try comparing built in functions of both. It is not that i cant design those reports in SSRS. But with CR i have the option of shifting many types of processing into the CR itself without putting extra burden on DB. and coding. – Deb Apr 26 '12 at 21:33
  • The clients often want to shift some sections from one place to another which can be done easily with CR. Also Page no., group item value, firstpage,lastpage wise customisations to sections are very easy through built in variables. Every sections are fully databound which was not the case with SSRS untill SSRS2008. The designer is much better than SSRS .The MS guys should atleast stay ahead then BO in their own field which is userfriendly GUI. The gap however is rapidly closing.But some of the new features of SSRS was available with CR since Day 1.This however is my personal opinion. – Deb Apr 26 '12 at 21:39
  • I would just like to address a couple of your points there - SSRS runs as it's own process (ReportingServicesService.exe) and manages it's own memory - it's not dependent on SQL Server memory, except to the extent that it uses ReportServerTempDB for some temporary processing. – Nathan Griffiths May 09 '12 at 00:36
  • 1
    Also the perception that SSRS is "free" is a common misconception. It is a component included with the SQL Server product, which is not free (except Express editions). The cost of all SQL Server components (SSRS, SSAS, Database Engine etc.) are factored into the price of a SQL Server license. That said, if most or all the components are utilised, it certainly makes a compelling value proposition. – Nathan Griffiths May 09 '12 at 00:36
2

I've used both (Crystal Reports 2008 and SSRS 2008) because I did not notice this thread in time.

Apart from the setup which was a bit easier with CR, I could not notice a single feature where CR is at least on par with SSRS. Yes, Crystal Reports is really that bad.

In my opinion the absoultely worst part in CR is the IDE. But there are also other killer features, such as poor SQL performance and horribly looking graphs (at least in the CR version that comes with VS 2008) are also notable "killer" features.

Adrian Grigore
  • 31,759
  • 32
  • 127
  • 205
  • 2
    Hm, I personally see CR designer as good and its sections and groups concept as pretty powerful. I could do incredible things with CR. It's more low-level but this (like in Photoshop) just allows to do more things. Of course, it also makes it more pain to do ;-) – queen3 Jan 24 '10 at 16:52
  • Unfortunately a LOT more pain in my experience... – Adrian Grigore Jan 25 '10 at 11:01
  • 3
    You keep saying "killer features". I don't think that word means what you think it means. – Vincent Vancalbergh Oct 18 '11 at 11:46
2

I have used both for years. Crystal reports charges way too much and I try to use SSRS whenever possible. However, SSRS does not support firefox or any other browser, only IE, this is a problem. The reports in Crystal look nicer and the exports are more powerful, users want good exporting to Word. If you are a java programmer, I would use Jasper Reports, it is free and uses Java language for functions.

1

I've worked with both now and have seen them side by side. Crystal has been good, but expensice over the years. Its clunky, but we've gron accustomed to it and familiar with the interface. I don't work in the LAMP environment, This house works with MS Dynamics and MAS with some pretty large clients.

I love not having to worry about the client install for SSRS. Distributions is far easier and sharing data sources and report models is working out well.

AS far as broweser go, I've seen perfectly rendered SSRS 2008 gauges in Firefox. I have exported those gauges to Excel without issue. I have deployed reports with and without MOSS to phones. The ability to use windows authentication to deploy reports as well as hide them is fantastic. The report viewer object in VS 2005 and later is sweet.

1

People, please refer to version of which you are talking about!

For example, the VS2008 built-in free RDLC reporting (the same as SQL Server 2005 Reporting Services) doesn't support binding fields in header and footer, and it is a basic feature!

Now I'm converting a huge report from this VS2008 Reporting / RDLC 2005 to Crystal Report 2008 Basic (which comes with VS2008) because it doesn't have this basic feature.

I am confident that Reporting Services 2.0 / RDLC 2008 (which comes with Visual Studio 2010) and better yet, the newest Reporting Services 3.0 / RDLC 2010 (which comes for FREE in SQL Server 2008 R2 Express With Advanced Services) are better SSRS solutions.

SQL Server R2 Express with Advanced Services (FREE) http://www.microsoft.com/express/Database/InstallOptions.aspx

Right now I am making a Proof of Concept for Reporting Services 3.0 / RDLC 2010, and will post the results.

Reporting Services (SSRS/RDLC) is always more easy to work, but easy comes with a price. For simple reports, always choose SSRS/RDLC. For complex reports with master-detail, page control and so on, please make a PoC of these scenarios with newest SSRS/RDLC versions (2008,2010) and also with Crystal Reports.

Wanderson Santos
  • 2,729
  • 1
  • 22
  • 16
  • Re : Binding fields in header & footer - there is a hacky workaround using hidden textboxes - see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb395166(SQL.90).aspx – StuartLC Nov 03 '10 at 15:28
1

I feel like a martian having an extensive and positive (but sometimes complex) experience with Crystal Reports, which is now completely integrated in our user interface (VBA), where requested reports parameters and filters are transparently inherited from the user interface ...

Philippe Grondier
  • 10,395
  • 3
  • 29
  • 67
1

If you're considering SSRS and are concerned about the fact that it's "free" but you need to either buy and additional SQL Server license or distribute SQL Express, then you might be interested in Data Dynamics Reports

It offers all that is in SSRS and adds Master Reports, Themes, Calendar data region, Data Visualization (Databar, Sparkline, Iconset, ColorScale, ...), complete object model for maximum programming flexibility, royalty free end user report designer, barcode report item, excel template export and data merging, and much more. You can download a trial from Data Dynamics (now GrapeCity) and try it with few reports, you will not be disappointed.

0

For those who are comparing the old Crystal Reports XI and Reporting Service 1.0 please see this 2005 post:

SQL Server Reporting Services and Crystal Reports: A Competitive Analysis http://www.crystalreportsbook.com/SSRSandCR_Conclusion.asp

Wanderson Santos
  • 2,729
  • 1
  • 22
  • 16
  • 1
    SSRS 1.0 was retired in 2008 and I seriously doubt CR would fare well in a direct comparison with the current release of SSRS, so I expect they haven't published one. But if they have, the URL would be of interest. – Peter Wone Jun 12 '11 at 03:35