Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!uc!noc.MR.NET!gacvx2.gac.edu!vax1.mankato.msus.edu!tshea
From: tshea@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: Excel for OS/2
Message-ID: <1991Apr7.195718.425@vax1.mankato.msus.edu>
Date: 8 Apr 91 01:57:17 GMT
References: <1991Apr1.211419.17076@morrow.stanford.edu> <1991Apr6.060154.4056@unixg.ubc.ca>
Organization: Mankato State University
Lines: 34

In article <1991Apr6.060154.4056@unixg.ubc.ca>, ballard@cheddar.ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard) writes:
> In article <1991Apr1.211419.17076@morrow.stanford.edu> GD.SAR@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sandy Rockowitz) writes:
>>Has anyone had experience using the OS/2 version of Excel?
>>Is it as mindless a port as Word appears to be, or does it actually
>>take advantage OS/2?
> The currently released version (2.2) is a genuine conversion(i.e., it doesn't
> use the SMK/WLO porting library), but it isn't a very good adaptation --
> no use of threads, and poor use of virtual memory.  
>  
> My understanding is that the new version (3.0) is supposed to be out in a
> few months (MS said "within six months of the release of the Windows version).
> I've also heard that it *IS* a mindless/SMK/WLO port, so will perform
> even worse than 2.2. 
> I hope this is wrong. 
>  
> Alan Ballard                   | Internet: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca
> University Computing Services  |   Bitnet: USERAB1@UBCMTSG
> University of British Columbia |    Phone: 604-822-3074
> Vancouver B.C. Canada V6R 1Z2  |      Fax: 604-822-5116


For the usual managers and secretaries, Excel 3.0 is a gift from god.

For people who actually do something serious with spreadsheets, Excel 3.0 (from
my tests of the beta version we have) is still a 'mindless' port but it 
performs a lot better then 2.2.

tim shea
International IS&DP
3M, Inc.

my opinions are my own...