Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Subject: Spreadsheets... (Was: When will new WordPerfect ...)
Message-ID: <17740@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 17 Jan 91 17:55:53 GMT
References: <1991Jan14.002805.1@ccvax.iastate.edu> <91016.165528AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 49

In article <91016.165528AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu> AXN100@psuvm.psu.edu writes:

>>While its doubtful 123 is the worst, its equally doubtful that its the best,
>>especially since Lotus themselves has developed a "better" spreadsheet that's
>>not 123 any more than Gold Disk's or MicroSoft's spreadsheets are.

>   The main advantage to 123 2.2 and 3.0 is the ability to make larger
>   spread sheets.  The older version of 123 2.01 put most of the info in
>   a spreadsheet into the 640 memory, and did not use extended or expanded
>   memory very well.  The new version gets around the 640 barrier,  this is
>   very important when LAN's are installed into companies.  

Sure, but any limit, other than memory [disk, real] is a silly one.  Just
because something has a silly restriction does not mean that, with the 
restriction removed, that thing is now "the best", or even "good".  Of course,
it's not strictly the authors' fault there, either, they do have this 70's
vintage programming model to work around.  Which just points out that a PClone
is not the proper platform for serious data intensive work.

>   Additionally, the spreadsheets that I have seen that were created with 
>   123 are much more powerful than any Excel spreadsheet that I have seen 
>   created.  

I have seen more powerful programs created with C than with Modula2.  That
says nothing about either language.  It does say something about where I have
been looking.  It doesn't really say much about the folks writing in either
language, either, since the sample set I have to work with is far too small
to be draw statistically valid conclusions from.

>   Don't get me wrong, I would welcome Excel with open arms if were to enter 
>   the Amiga market.

Sure, I would welcome a good spreadsheet for the Amiga.  I used to build timing
models for hardware systems on our VAX based CCALC spreadsheet, back in the
C128 days.  But vowed never to do it again until I could get a spreadsheet
that's really designed to do this correctly.  You really need a sheet with
user-definable cell types for this to work correctly.  I'd be happier with a
special-purpose tool like DV/dt (without the Mac interface) for this kind of
work, though.  But a good enough spreadsheet can do a large variety of jobs,
and on an Amiga, any limit on the number of cells, rows, columns, pages, 
arrays, etc. would be purely articifial, and thus avoided, in any decent
implementation.

>                                               Ajai
-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
	"Don't worry, 'bout a thing. 'Cause every little thing, 
	 gonna be alright"		-Bob Marley