Yeah, real helpful there buddy.
To the original poster, you should know that Excel, despite being a slick
spreadsheet program, does NOT do everything better than Lotus 1-2-3. You
have to give up some very powerful and cool features when moving to Excel
from 1-2-3 but that's to be expected. Sometimes there are workarounds,
sometimes you need help from VBA, and sometimes you need help from Microsoft
Access.
Having said that, Excel obviously has powerful features that 1-2-3 doesn't
have. So you really can't have it all.
I've brought up the issue of why Excel still hasn't incorporated such
features as true 3-D spreadsheets, a powerful Version Manager like 1-2-3 has,
and my biggest irritation, the inability to enter a formula in the criteria
argument of the database functions like =DSUM. There are other things 1-2-3
does better, too.
No one replies here, neither does Microsoft. I guess they just want to
avoid the issue. Maybe patents are protecting Lotus and Microsoft doesn't
want to infringe on them. Maybe the brilliant programmers at Microsoft
haven't figured out how to implement these things yet (although 1-2-3 has had
them for over a decade). I don't know, but what bugs me is ignoring the
issue. I'd like it if the Excel lovers or power users (and I'm one of them)
would man-up and just admit that Excel isn't the be-all and end-all of
spreadsheets. I use it daily, all day long and haven't used 1-2-3 for over 6
years. I can still be objective and true to myself and admit that it isn't
the Holy Grail like some here would have us believe. I still hold out hope
for Excel to become truly powerful but after so many years it looks like
Microsoft is impeded by legal issues. Maybe they should buy 1-2-3 from IBM
and get it over with. Don't know if the government will let them, that would
be total and complete domination of that market.
