Excel Clone for Linux Now in Beta

Martin Kotulla writes "SoftMaker, a German software developer, has released the first public beta of PlanMaker 2004, a native-Linux spreadsheet that is highly Excel-compatible ... in fact, this app is basically Microsoft Excel ported to Linux, including Excel-compatible charting and even AutoShapes. Here is a chart comparing Excel, OpenOffice.org, and PlanMaker." Update: 05/07 19:07 GMT by M : Softmaker.de is temporarily down; the site can still be reached at softmaker.com.

Comments

Works on other free unixes (at least 1)

[grub]

in fact, this app is basically Microsoft Excel ported to Linux,

A port? Did Microsoft gave the developers access to the Excel source code? Anyhow, that nitpicking aside the package seems to be working perfectly well on my OpenBSD desktop w/Linux compatibility enabled.

Nice.

Re:Works on other free unixes (at least 1)

[tepples]

Did Microsoft gave the developers access to the Excel source code?

No, but MSDN lists almost every single function in the app, making cloning Excel just a job of implementing the functions.

The wrong path

[MoxCamel]

As long as Linux application developers continue to copy Microsoft, in a vain attempt to be "compatible," Microsoft will always have the edge. They will always set the pace for others to follow.

If you want to make a better product, you can't "embrace and extend." You have to make a better product. By providing file-reading compatibility, you only re-enforce the proliferation of closed file formats. You also cripple your application, to maintain compatibility. (if you want a nifty feature, you have to make sure Excel has it too.)

When people send me Excel files, I kindly ask them to re-send the file in CSV or some other format. Yes, there are things you can only do in native file format. But the vast majority of users never do those things.

Re:The wrong path

[pegr]

If you want to make a better product, you can't "embrace and extend." You have to make a better product. By providing file-reading compatibility, you only re-enforce the proliferation of closed file formats.

Uh, by "cloning" a "closed" file format, you actually "open" the format to other uses. When you get a large number of vendors using the "closed" format, the original vendor now has to consider very carefully additional changes to the format for fear of breaking competitor's products. The fear is not breaking the other products but reducing compatibility of their own product. Using "closed" formats is a good thing, depending on market conditions.

Re:The wrong path

[Major_Small]

that doesn't always work. if you're running a *nix box and you want to be included with the rest of the world using windows machines, you're going to have to be compatible to even have any chance at competition...

what *nix needs is not to be different, but to be the same and different at the same time, like it is... the reason i use *nix is because I can deal the files windows users give me and I can use other *nix-only programs at the same time...

Re:The wrong path

[Paulrothrock]

But people won't buy things just because they're better, they have to interoperate fully. You can't say to a client "No, I can't see your Excel file because I hate copying Microsoft." Until and unless Microsoft adopts open file formats (based on XML, hopefully), Linux won't be able to out-innovate Microsoft. Only by copying them (initially, at least) will we be able to compete.

Interestingly, I think XML-based file format standards are a great way to break Microsoft's monopoly without disrupting market forces.

Re:The wrong path

[Erratio]

You kindly ask them to send a different format, but you have to look at it from the standpoint of the average user, who doesn't want to have to deal with that stuff. The fact is that MS Office documents have become somewhat of a standard in the business community and you can't hope to attain widespread use with software unless those formats are handled easily. This is just another step in being about to easily transition people to linux, it's not a step forward in development. As far as "better products" go, most people that care about that wouldn't be using MS Office to begin with.

Re:The wrong path

[TedTschopp]

When people send me Excel files, I kindly ask them to re-send the file in CSV or some other format. Yes, there are things you can only do in native file format. But the vast majority of users never do those things.

Well, I see you never have to deal with people who are normal business users.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I find that normal business users don't know how to do much of the fancy stuff in Excel or any of their other programs. The most common usage of Excel I've found is glorified forms. Oh, I'm not saying that its not used for what it really can be used for, but in those cases the person doing the Excel work is usually an Analyst who is working for the person who is actually consuming the reports.

The idea here is to give the normal business user a replacement for the expensive office product.

And as far as innovating and flanking Microsoft on the Spreadsheet market. Its a spreadsheet, there really isn't much more that can be done to the product to innovate it. Copying Microsoft is a great place to start.

Look at Microsoft's innovation in Excel over the last couple of editions. YEAH SMART TAGS!. That's about it. Oh I know there is more, but come on the market has been dead years now. The only place left to compete is on Price.

Ted Tschopp

Re:The wrong path

[pheared]

While I mostly agree with you, there is still a problem. Just making a better product doesn't solve the problem if there is no one even considering a switch to your product. While I think that it is mostly in vain, there is still some value to playing catch-up because you can pick up some more users who are caught in MSs wake.

With more users and more developers and more attention you will be able to convince R&D departments to spend more money on creating this better product for Linux.

Re:The wrong path

[Fearless Freep]

>you get a large number of vendors using the "closed" format, the original vendor now has to consider very carefully additional changes to the format for fear of breaking competitor's products.

This is Microsoft we're talking about...that's not a risk, that's part of the plan

Re:The wrong path

[Woogiemonger]

As long as Linux application developers continue to copy Microsoft, in a vain attempt to be "compatible," Microsoft will always have the edge. They will always set the pace for others to follow.

I disagree. First off, being able to read Excel files compatibly in Linux is something Microsoft can't provide. You get an available market share that way, and even add to it. Also, the demo on the web site seems to demonstrate reading in Excel files and displaying them.

While I'm betting they want to be able to support outward compatibility, they should be in no way restricted to it. Just like going from Excel to OpenOffice, you can implement extra features in PlanMaker, let's say, and then save files that won't be perfect but will be good enough for Excel. Just like MS's business strategy, there'll perhaps be some nifty PlanMaker-specific features to make a company want to in time convert to PlanMaker-only.

Nothing's wrong with supporting the most popular format out there though. Otherwise, you're expecting users to take too far a leap.

Re:The wrong path

[SpyPlane]

Agreed. At the same time though, reality is that some people don't want change. If/When someone decides to switch to linux, it is good to know they can still open all of their old files, whether simple or feature complete in their new OS. This limits the ACTUAL amount of change they have to deal with. It's enough of a concern worrying about hardware working or not, but when you have to worry about converting all personal or corporate documents, you just about eliminated any gain from the change.

Re:The wrong path

[rrkap]

When people send me Excel files, I kindly ask them to re-send the file in CSV or some other format. Yes, there are things you can only do in native file format. But the vast majority of users never do those things.

Ah, yes. I can't remember the last time I saw someone use excel to create a chart or calculate something. The fact is that calculation and presentation of data are the two main points of spreadsheets and neither works with CSV files.

Re:The wrong path

[Shakrai]

When people send me Excel files, I kindly ask them to re-send the file in CSV or some other format. Yes, there are things you can only do in native file format. But the vast majority of users never do those things.

I'd love to be able to do that. Unfortunately when somebody sends my company an Excel file it's usually a customer who (more likely then not) is about to spend a lot of money. I can't see telling them "I'm sorry, please send your file in a different format, we don't support the most widely used Spreadsheet format here."

I'm not trolling either -- only pointing out the fact that not all of us have that luxury. I would agree 100% with your comments about not following Microsoft's lead and coming up with our own ideas -- but then, how much more room for innovation is there in spreadsheet or word processing world? Has Microsoft themselves come up with any new ideas (eye candy doesn't count)?

Re:The wrong path

[SydShamino]

>> As long as Linux application developers continue to copy Microsoft, in a vain attempt to be "compatible," Microsoft will always have the edge.

... until Microsoft breaks its own compatibility, and people see that they have a more-compatible alternative.

Microsoft has a lot of capatibility breaking in its upcoming schedule. No reason other alternatives can't be ready to step up and provide continued support for the existing "standards". Think about Intel and AMD. Intel decided to break compatibility with x86 for their 64-bit instruction set. AMD made a compatible set, and AMD won the "war," forcing Intel to scrap their architecture and copy AMD.

Re:The wrong path

[baudilus]

I disagree. Microsoft gained said edge by copying someone else's product (Apple copied Xerox, then Microsoft copied Apple) and "improving" on it (read: bastardizing). Same thing with Japanese automobile companies.

To claim that compatibility reinforces exclusive file format proliferation is like saying putting a supercharger on an engine only reinforces the proliferation of less powerful engines.

Look at it practically: how do you expect business to want to migrate users to Linux from Microsoft if *nix developers go out of their way to make it more difficult? IMHO, this is the perfect venue: introduce a product that has everything M$'s product has, and things that it doesn't. Very quickly you'll find that the tables have turned and it's Microsoft trying to "catch up" to the other product. Who has the edge then?

Re:The wrong path

[mopslik]

Uh, by "cloning" a "closed" file format, you actually "open" the format to other uses.

The "edge" to which the parent refers is that of letting Microsoft define the format all the time. If Microsoft constantly sets the standard, then other developers who are creating "clones" spend most of their time trying to fiddle with the file format, rather than improve/extend the functionality of the software.

Sure, the format's open now, but what do you do when the company decides to change their file format for the next release of their software?

Re:The wrong path

[Azureflare]

Compatibility and User interface are two different issues here. You seem to be lumping them together, which IMO is just wrong to do. OpenOffice.org is able to import .xls files pretty well (though not perfectly) and the interface is pretty different from Excel; I wouldn't say OpenOffice.org is "copying" Microsoft's UI in the least.

In the case of this product, yes it is copying the UI AND the file format of Microsoft. What does this mean for the average user? It means they don't have to buy Microsoft Office to work with .xls files, they just need to get this application.

This reminds me of like Lindows^H^H^H^Hspire; it's oriented towards users who are comfortable with Microsoft's design, and have learned how to do things using Microsoft products. Those kind of users want something they're familiar with, so they will be more likely to use something that is familiar to them. We still have our KOffice and OpenOffice.org spreadsheet applications; is there something wrong with this approach?

If this application didn't exist, people would just run Excel in Crossover Office. That's what I do actually, so this app may allow me to throw off Microsoft Excel completely, if it functions as advertised (currently slashdotted to hell).

I think it's rather silly to say "No! Never will I support anything Microsoft!" when the majority of users use it. This application may allow users to take another step away from Microsoft lock-in. The goal isn't to "embrace" Microsoft's technology, the goal is to create a viable alternative, that will create the minimum amount of fuss in transition.

Re:The wrong path

[pegr]

The "edge" to which the parent refers is that of letting Microsoft define the format all the time. If Microsoft constantly sets the standard, then other developers who are creating "clones" spend most of their time trying to fiddle with the file format, rather than improve/extend the functionality of the software.

But that edge is lost when changing the format drives away your customers when they can no longer interoperate with users with competing products. It's a critical mass issue. When so many people are using MS's format with competing products that MS can't change the format for fear of a user backlash of not being able to interoperate, you've frozen the format and can now move into "open" formats with greater functionality... functionality MS has to duplicate just to stay in the game. Now who is copying whom?

Re:The wrong path

[mopslik]

But that edge is lost when changing the format drives away your customers when they can no longer interoperate...

You mean like the notorious Office95/97 issues that Microsoft implemented themselves? This is intentional -- it forces users to upgrade to the latest release. It's not a compatibility issue, it's a profitability issue.

MS can't change the format for fear of a user backlash of not being able to interoperate...

There's nothing to stop Microsoft from using an "open" standard in their next release, in addition to supporting older file formats (like they currently do). Look at your file filters for Office. There are filters to read older versions of Office documents, since the formats have changed. Again, it has nothing to do with compatibility. It has to do with user lock-in and guaranteed financial return.

Re:The wrong path

[16K Ram Pack]

I'm not trying to be mean, but I find that normal business users don't know how to do much of the fancy stuff in Excel or any of their other programs. The most common usage of Excel I've found is glorified forms. Oh, I'm not saying that its not used for what it really can be used for, but in those cases the person doing the Excel work is usually an Analyst who is working for the person who is actually consuming the reports.

I've seen nothing used since Excel 5.0. Most Excel work I've seen is databases and tables - like lists of project tasks or snapshots of account lists.

I think the whole problem with office is that there really is nothing much that can be added for people to say "yeah! must upgrade". I remember seeing the feature list between Access 2000 and Access 2002, and the only useful feature to me was that you had a printer object in the VBA object model.

Re:The wrong path

[danheskett]

When people send me Excel files, I kindly ask them to re-send the file in CSV or some other format. Yes, there are things you can only do in native file format. But the vast majority of users never do those things.

The thing is, you are wrong. I deal with a lot of excel users, and let me assure that 90% of them use at least one dynamic field, data generated field, calculated field, or reasonably appropriate formatting.

There is no open well-designed spreadsheet format that is recognized by a standards body. There should be one. In alot of industries, people like you are excluded from many activities because of an insistance on using an inferior file format.

The real-estate industry in my area is pretty cut throat - either use the software we want or you get replaced for a management-friendly vendor. I've got dozens of appraisers who would love to get work.. I pick the ones that are easiest for me to manage. If I get data back on taxes, or metrics, or whatever and I have to spend anything more than 30-seconds formatting/reviewing it for sending to end-clients, you've wasted my time.

Re:The wrong path

[tanguyr]

MS Office has suffered from compatibility problems in the past between versions - i remember having to ask customers/vendors to please "save as Word 6" because we hadn't upgraded to Office 98 yet. If there's one format that truely deserves the label of "a standard in the business community" then it's PDF: when business users exchange documents they're exchanging digitized paper meant for reading.
Once you start talking about exchanging the data in the document (like when you import that spreadsheet into your database) then you're not talking business users, you're talking developers (hopefully for you, or else prepare for the frustration of the guy who sends you a report that's "almost" in the right format).
As for this particular product: about time. They might not post on Slashdot, but there are hordes of people inside every medium to large company that spend their whole working day in front of Excel (and we call them Excel jockeys). Visicalc was a big factor in the early success of the Apple 2. Lotus 1-2-3 did the same for DOS based PCs.

Re:The wrong path

[harrkev]

Excel is an extremely poor tool for doing anything other than basic graphs and calculations. For engineering purposes, it's near useless.

This may be true, but it is not very compelling. Spreadsheets were invented for the bean counters. A CPA could spend his/her entire career without EVER using SIN, or COS. Budgets require the basic four functions, and some sort of IF statement. To do compound interest, it helps to have e^x. If you just provide that and graphs, then you have 95% of the user base covered. I suspect that it is the minority of users who ever use the more complicated functions.

Re:The wrong path

[IntlHarvester]

The problem with these warez is that the core userbase is ultra-conservative and doesn't want anything changed. The graphing in Excel is basically the same as it was 15 years ago, for example. The core userbase is Finance people, and it will never expand to Engineering, Academics, etc.

When Lotus ruled the spreadsheet heap with 1-2-3, they had the same problem. They came out with Improv and a couple other spreadsheets because they were scared to change how the flagship worked.

Re:The wrong path

[kkelly]

I disagree, excel is the STANDARD for number cunching and for good reason. I can take excel from Office XP and directly connect to an olap data source or just about any other data source for that matter. I can create pivot tables, do trend analysis, data mining, and most enterprise reporting from this single application. In addition I can put that information on the web and interact with my data in the exact same way as I would within the application. While all of this can probably be done with some combination of open source alternatives, you just can't beat the ease of use that comes with MS Excel. I can create my data sources, be they relational, dimensional, or olap regardless of complexity and tell the business users to analyze to their hearts content. They know how to use excel so the learning curve is practically nil. I am a huge fan of open source software in general, but gnumeric just doesn't cut it at the enterprise level. I hope this clone can bridge some of the gaps.

my .02

Re:The wrong path

[yerfatma]

Not if you have a second account with mod points.

Re:The wrong path

[AstroDrabb]

MS's XML format is more of a PR stunt then really being open. MS has barked a million times about "IP" and MS Office is one of their biggest cash cows. Basically they made a schema that will let you read the MS Office docs, but they still keep tons of closed proprietary stuff in those XML files. What is the purpose of being able to read the file if the important content is a binary blob in some proprietary format? The plain text is readable, so a simple Word doc is easy to read (though competing office apps have been able to do that for a long time). MS Office will truly be open when MS release full specs of the file format and all that could possibly be in them. I can give you an XML file with a Base64 encoded blob of proprietary data. Just because it is XML does not make it Open. OpenOffice's format is _really_ open. You can get docs that explain the format and how to read or write OOo's file formats. This is not the case for MS. If it is, please provide a link to the MS Office document _specs_ and not just some silly schema.

As a little test, create a new Excel file and on Sheet 2 put the following data:

1 1
1 2
1 4
1 4

Now on Sheet1, insert a chart using the data on Sheet2. Now try to save it as "XML SpreadSheet (*.xml)". You will get a warning that all "AutoShapes, other objects and Charts" will be removed. What is the point of this "open" XML format if it cannot save complex spreadsheets? MS will never let their MS Office format go. End of story.

Re:The wrong path

[AstroDrabb]

I find that normal business users don't know how to do much of the fancy stuff in Excel or any of their other programs. The most common usage of Excel I've found is glorified forms

I have to agree 100% here. I have worked for 3 fortune 500 companies and 99.5% of all MS Office docs that go around are very simple and OpenOffice.org can handle those needs with no problems. The only users I have seen using more complex features are financial analyst who had to be trained in Excel, so they can be trained in OOo. OOo is ready now to displace MS Office in the workplace. However, it needs to be a corporate wide choice. A single user cannot start asking everyone to send them docs in OOo, they will be laughed at. Now if the whole company converts, then there is a lot of weigth to go with that choice. Any other company that wants to do business will have to send in an open format such as OOo, CSV, HTML, PDF, etc. The hardest part of the switch is not OOo, but getting upper management to become "un-brain-washed" by the MS Sales guys of how MS Office will "save them money", make them "more productive" and help them to one day achieve the dream of a "paperless office".

Re:The wrong path

[SillyNickName4me]

Let me correct you on a few points:

A single user cannot start asking everyone to send them docs in OOo, they will be laughed at.

Well, no need for that. OOo does a pretty good job reading proprietary word and excel files, oh an powerpoint files as well.

The thign is that the OOo user will have to remember to send files to MS Office users that they can actually read.

company that wants to do business will have to send in an open format such as OOo, CSV, HTML, PDF, etc.

Last time I looked, PDF is quite owned by Adobe.
Yes, there are open implementations of PDF writign and reading code,, and quite good ones for that matter.. but hrm..
Kets say it is about as open as lots of the stuff from the 'Open' group..

At any rate, it works well for publishing your texts since everyoen can read it and it will print as you want it.

Re:The wrong path

[skoda]

Why not? If you're spending a lot of money, then minor things like file formats won't make any difference to a sale.

Just the opposite. If I'm spending lots of money, I expect good service. If a vendor can't do trivial things, like reading my Excel file, then I being to wonder if they're also incapable of doing the hard work that I'm considering paying them for.

Not reading an Excel file is like refusing to communicate by email. It promotes a poor view of the company/consultant and suggests gross incompetence.

Re:The wrong path

[ccp]

The "edge" to which the parent refers is that of letting Microsoft define the format all the time. If Microsoft constantly sets the standard, then other developers who are creating "clones" spend most of their time trying to fiddle with the file format, rather than improve/extend the functionality of the software.

Sure, the format's open now, but what do you do when the company decides to change their file format for the next release of their software?

What this argument fails to realize is that MS can't migrate 100% of its victims to the new format. Far from it.
I don't know about you, but in my part of the world the VAST majority of people is running Office 97 on Win 98.
Are they going to upgrade? Not in your life! A PC here costs serious money, and the most usual configurations couldn't even DREAM on having Win XP installed on them.

So, even the .doc format is fragmenting, and old Win users are unable to open documents written with the latest version. A majority of MS Word users is stranded with no intention to upgrade.
The old versions of .doc are effectively frozen, and filters are NOT running behind a moving target, so they're getting better all the time.
And the fun part is, OpenOffice is rather good at opening MS Office docs.

Go figure! Soon OO will be the tool of choice for navigating the multiple, more or less incompatible MS formats.

Cheers,

Re:The wrong path

[sir_cello]

> The graphing in Excel is basically the same as it was 15 years ago, for example. The core userbase is Finance people, and it will never expand to Engineering, Academics, etc.

You made my point better than I could. Anyone who says that "Excel is useful for Engineers" either (a) doesn't know anything about Engineering; (b) doesn't actually do any useful Engineering; (b) is quite a power-user of Excel beyond the average competance that a normal Engineer can dedicate to a single application.

Re:The wrong path

[Shakrai]

If you judge a programming company by what office suite they use, you'll get people working for you who can't program for shit, but know how to use MS-Office. University dropouts anyone? They all use Excel perfectly.

It's this type of fanatical belief that will keep OSS confined to the niche that it currently occupies. You aren't judging that programming company by the Office Suite they are using. You are judging them by their customer service. If they are going to force me to jump though hoops to send them a document then WTF are they going to do for me at 3am when that project crashes and we need it back up ASAP?

And who the heck said anything about programming companies anyway? This applies to every industry. I work in the Insurance business. We need commercial prospects to send us all types of data in order to allow us to prepare a quote for them. Are we really going to tell them (after spending weeks or months networking to meet the right people to even get permission to quote the business in the first place) that we can't open the most commonly used spreadsheet format in the World to prove some point about Microsoft being evil (and I think they are -- and my PHB would actually agree with me -- though his concern is how they rape us on licensing fees -- mine is security/support) or OSS being the next great thing?

Newsflash: If we want OSS to be successful in the business world then we are going to have to play by their rules. They aren't going to change for us.

No it's not. It's not even similar. It's like taking offence because you can't read a file-format I just made up.

Just "made up"? When you "just make up" a file format that is used by billions of people around the World then we'll talk about taking offense. Like it or not it is the de-facto standard. Go ahead and make your point with your next potential customer. It probably won't cost you the sale -- but some of us aren't willing to take that chance to make such a petty point.

Re:The wrong path

[Knacklappen]

1. Excel is an extremely poor tool for doing anything other than basic graphs and calculations. For engineering purposes, it's near useless.

Don't know what kind of engineer you are but in the Real World (TM) you will find lots of engineers doing some quick & dirty calculations in Excel.

Sure, you could use Matlab or Mathematica or Maple but have you checked the price of these programs? I managed to get us some licenses of MathCad (and make a point of using them as much as possible) but even this is not for free. Well, Octave is, even free as in beer-drunken speech, but the point I want to make is that for a user whos Windows-based PC came with MS Office installed, Excel is the easiest way. And in combination with SQL and VBA it's often powerful enough...

As long as you don't require graphs with more than 32768 items in one data series or more than 65536 rows on your spread sheet. But for smaller data series (say up to 10000 rows, with 20 columns) Excel is pretty OK.

The one thing I hate about Excel is that it is too easy to just put together some quick & dirty calculations. Regardless with what intention I start, over time my Excel sheets always grow beyond what they intially where planned for. And then it's getting ugly, becuase after some time you lose control over the relationships of the cells and equations. Sure, there are some tools for that, but not enough.
And VBA is great, too, but when you just make a print-out for a colleague, you only get the spread sheet, not the connections between the cells and not the VBA-routines in the background. I now try to make up for all my past Excel-crimes by step-wise converting everything important to MathCad. Because there (as in Mathematica or Maple) a print-out shows all the underlying equations and algorithms in a natural and easy-to-understand way.

So, to return to where I started: Excel is not "near-useless for engineering purposes". I consider myself a decent engineer and have done serious work in Excel, and I have some Excel-addicted colleagues, who I really admire (and sometimes envy) for their work.

Re:The wrong path

[ekuns]

Don't know what kind of engineer you are but in the Real World (TM) you will find lots of engineers doing some quick & dirty calculations in Excel.

Back in my scientist days, we only used one of a small number of custom written applications. (Named "paw" and "mn_fit" plus a few others less commonly used.) Excel cannot even dream of producing the kinds of plots that I had to produce for my dissertation. Of course, these tools were command-line driven, but that gave the power to iterate on a plot, to view arbitrary plots of N-tuple data, to change the scales and so on. MUCH more power than Excel gives. I had scatterplots with many tens of thousands of points. (Took a LOOOONNNNNGGGGG time to print on laser printers of that day!)

But as you say, for quick and dirty stuff, Excel and the like are fine. I haven't figured out how to do two dimensional error bars -- the cross shapes showing the uncertainty in each variable -- and complicated stuff like that, but maybe Excel can do stuff like that as well. But if I were doing a scientific or engineering paper, I would not use Excel.

hai2u

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it have a clippy too?

Home use only

[thebra]

I don't think that an Excel clone will ever work in the business enviorment unless it can run all the addins like the ones for Essbase and Peoplesoft.

Re:Home use only

[joshuao3]

Indeed! I've worked with Excel for a long time and my experience has been that most users (and I mean a VAST majority) don't use any plugins. They are happy to use it to tally up numbers, perform a bit of number crunching, etc. A solid application that looks and feels and interoperates with Excel on a fundamental level should make a huge splash in Linux. It certainly won't drive new users to linux on it's own, but it'll give them a reason to stay if they already are.

Add in an on par word processor, powerpoint tool, and outlook-esque client and you'll win a lot of new clients.

Re:Home use only

[JanneM]

Like Gnumeric, you mean?

It's not like the real excel unless

[caston]

It includes the flight sim as well! They better now have left out the flight simulator!

What surprised me most

[ObviousGuy]

The thing that really surprised me was how badly OpenOffice supported (or rather, didn't support) Excel's functionality.

You may say that those features are part of the 80% of features that aren't used, but someone's using them. If those someones aren't able to use those features, OpenOffice is useless for them.

Re:What surprised me most

[sommere]

So they were able to pick out 5-6 features that OO.o couldn't support that they did. That's hardly proof that they support more excel features than OO.o.

If an independent group created a bunch of hard to read excel files and they compared how many each displayed correctly -- then I'd believe that their support is better. For all I know they went out of their way to find limitations of OO.o and implement those features first so they could make those images.

Re:What surprised me most

[MarkRebuck]

I believe the classic quote is "90% of the people use only 10% of the functionality of [software]. The problem is that everyone uses a different 10%."

Re:What surprised me most

[garcia]

I have been saying this for quite some time on here. OpenOffice is NOT an acceptable replacement for MS Office regardless of what you hear the slashbots saying.

Yes, OpenOffice is good for what *most* people do. It certainly does not support everything that everyone uses. Just because it is "good enough" for some it certainly isn't what the rest of us want.

From what I saw in the screenshots only it *looks* good. I won't know until I actually run it. I am a bit leary of running any beta software that I don't have access to the source code.

Running strangely named binaries from .tgz files reminds me of days-gone-by in Linux... I figured for a well done "port" that they would at least have the idea that they should make the executable something named better than what it is.

Re:What surprised me most

[garcia]

I have no direct proof on me but anything I have ever tried to open in OO (word or excel) has barfed.

I don't consider myself any sort of "power user" with Office products either. If a simple Word document won't open I can't believe your comment that "they picked the 5-6 things that OO can't do" is valid.

Re:What surprised me most

[Jody Goldberg]

I'd be interested in getting copies of any file that you have trouble with to see how Gnumeric fairs. Getting good test cases can be very helpful. Our confidentiality policy can apply if desired. Please contact me.

Thanks

Will it Deliver?

[WordODD]

MS Excel is an awesome program one of two that makes Office actually worthwhile. If Planmaker 2004 this truly delivers then one of the major stumbling blocks for OO.org has been overcome.

Won't last long...

[PeteDotNu]

Plenty of images on that page. I give that web server ten minutes.

What about Gnumeric?

[ErisCalmsme]

Gnumeric is so great, and it opens Excel files too? Plus is has so many functions (including every singel excel function). I'm not sure I'd use a different spreadsheet.

Re:What about Gnumeric?

[Rysc]

Those screenshots are out of date. By about 6 years. Try some newer ones.

Re:What about Gnumeric?

[Tet]

Gnumeric is so great, and it opens Excel files too

Agreed. Like OO.o, it doesn't have 100% coverage of everything in Excel. But I can say that for real world use, rather than contrived examples, it opens every spreadsheet I've tried it with, without problems[1]. It also has the benefit of being literally 10 times faster than oocalc.

[1] I'm talking about recent versions here. If you haven't tried it lately, give post-1.2 releases a shot. It's come a long way...

Not free

[gspr]

Since this software seems to not be free, it can't really beat OpenOffice, can it? No, it can't.

Google cache

[GillBates0]

of the first two links:

Softmaker
PlanMaker

Of all the Apps to port

[VanWEric]

They choose Excel? I have never been able to figure that program out. Give me Minitab anyday. Mmmmm..... Multiple Regression. Excuse me. Me and fantasy minitab for linux have to be alone right now.

Excel clone? Needs a cool name.

[L. VeGas]

I've got just the name. XXXcell

That way it will get distributed on the P2P networks a lot faster.

Crossover

[Mr. McGibby]

While I applaud the effort, and I'm sure they'll sell some copies; other than some cost savings how is this functionally different from using Crossover Office? I've been using Excel in Linux for quite some time and it works perfectly.

Sadly, it won't be around long

[spidergoat2]

If it's a port, the Microsoft legal machine will jump into action. On the other hand, if it's not a port, the Microsoft legal machine will jump into action. I think it's doomed.

But what about the Macros?

[Gilesx]

This is not a flame. I *want* this product to succeed. But unfortunately, being able to display wordart better than openoffice isn't a deal maker, and especially isn't going to make me choose paid for software over free software. However, if they were to suddenly enable you to import all your VB macros with a Spreadsheet, then I'd happily hand my card number over there and then. Unfortunately, until then, this really just smacks as a "me too" product, and I can't see it taking much of openoffice's market share.

Re:But what about the Macros?

[martin-k]

Currently, PlanMaker imports the macros but doesn't touch them. When you save your file, they are saved in the output file as well.

Actual VBA macro support is our next step. PlanMaker for Windows and TextMaker for Windows have an OLE object model that is already close to Excel's and Word's, but we have to move that stuff to Linux as well.

Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH

Re:But what about the Macros?

[confused one]

I'd have to agree about the importance of VBA. Some might call it the source of all evil; but...

In one of my jobs we used Excel to do all of our analysis. It would import all of the raw data (text files) and we could use VBA scripts to do the harder calculations (field integrals, density calculations, beam trajectory, etc.) then post the results back into a sheet. From there it was extraordinarily easy to produce graphical plots of the results.

I think you see my point.

Re:But what about the Macros?

[martin-k]

We have the source code to our own Visual Basic-compatible scripting engine, and before we put that into the product, we'll make sure it is sandboxed. That is: no accesses to the outside, file system etc. without explicit permission by the user. The worst thing a virus could then do is to modify the documents currently loaded.

Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH

Only looking at graphics output biased comparison

[UrbanFallout]

On the site it seems the only comparisons are for a certain set of graphs. This is not a true test of compatibilty.

What about how well the pivot table works?, are the goal seeking functions the same (I hope not)?

Surely these should also be mentioned.

why only focus on word art?

Why?

[JanneM]

I mean, Gnumeric is excellent - it even emulates excel bugs if you want to (and will not, otherwise). I seriously do not understand why people would use another spreadhseet.

Nice for these "benchmarks"

[CodeMonkey4Hire]

Yeah, they've got their tool kicking OO's butt, but they've also chosen the benchmarks.

I see that the beta is free, but will it stay that way? That's one of the biggest reasons to choose OO (unless you are just an OSS fanatic).

mirror of comparison chart

[whizkid042]

http://www.unixauthority.com/~fiskeja/mirror/www.s oftmaker.de/pmwcomp_en.htm

Not necessarily (Re:The wrong path)

[linuxtelephony]

Not necessarily. Think about it. Years ago it was Lotus 1-2-3. Then Borland created their version, Quattro Pro, and included the Lotus 1-2-3 menu structure (as an option) and macro compatibility.

It was this compatibility that enabled a lot of people to leave Lotus for other spreadsheets. I was pretty impressed when Quattro Pro 1, out of the box, was able to run my microwave path calculation tool, for 1-2-3, without ANY modification.

I don't remember early Excel days, by the time I started using Excel, I had been using Quattro Pro for a while. Excel worked in Windows similar to Quattro Pro on DOS, and that was nice at the time.

The point is, it took the compatibility and similarity with the "top dog" in order for new players to get into the game. Once they were in the game, they were able to provide features unique to their product, above and beyond the compatibility with the original. Eventually, the original began to lose its place as the leader.

I'm talking pre-Windows 95 timeframe.

This, and the Xandros Desktop in the previous story, may provide just the similarity necessary to get real people to switch and try it out. Once they find that they CAN make the switch and still do what they need to, they will be more inclined to try more new and different things. When that happens, then Linux on the desktop will be viable, and the Microsoft desktop penetration levels should begin to erode.

Don't Forget Gnumeric!

[Rysc]

Gnumeric is a much better spreadsheet program than OOo Spread. It's also better than Excell in all ways in which it competes, except for charting . (And they'll be fixing that *real soon now*). Enough of this crappy OOo stuff and commerical stuff. Use Gnumeric! This is not SIAG or some krappy Koffice attempt, it's teh best Excel-styel spreadsheet program you can get.

Re:Don't Forget Gnumeric!

[praedor]

I've used all three (gnumeric, kspread, and OOcalc). I do find that gnumeric is quite good, but not really any better at those data analysis tools than kspread is. Both gnumeric and kspread suffer (TREMENDOUSLY) in the charting arena. Gnumeric doesn't even have a broken rudimentary graphing capability while kspread ties into kchart which is a horrible charting app. OOcalc kicks both their butts on charting, but it doesn't match up to the charting possible from excel.

Of course, excel cannot hold a candle to the charting capabilites of DeltaGraph or CricketGraph (both Mac apps...do they have PC versions?). I have begged the koffice developers to fix the atrocious kcharting app so that it is actually of use (mostly hard-of-hearing ears if not outright deaf ears). I hope against hope that OO will improve its charting capabilities (C'mon! You CANNOT do proper charting if you don't do error bars). Gnumeric doesn't even enter the picture here. Nothing at all in the charting arena so all the nice data analysis done in gnumeric is for naught. There's no way to plot it out, no way to graphically represent it.

Re:Don't Forget Gnumeric!

[JanneM]

As Jody says in another post, the actual charting is still in its early stages for Gnumeric - but improving rapidly (and user feedback is of course of prime importance).

For the important background parts - getting the mathematics right - Gnumeric is _very_ mature. It has far more reliable models than excel.

(self-serving promotion ahead)
It also has a pretty decent Swedish translation...

But the clueless will not get it.

[nlinecomputers]

I agree with you that Linux must make a better product not an equal product. But like it or not it is a Windows world.

"When people send me Excel files, I kindly ask them to re-send the file in CSV or some other format."

By doing that are you "making a stand that Joe User will notice" or just being an irritant that will make people avoid dealing with you(assuming they have that choice).

Linux is going to have to do both. Show that it can work with Windows, easily, AND do it better. You attitude about file formats just shows them that Linux is neither.

data analysis lacking?

[ecklesweb]

Looking through the product's web site, it looks like the software is pretty lacking compared to Excel in the data analysis arena. According to the site, the data analysis features include:

Analyze Data

Create database ranges inside your worksheets
Data grouping (outliner)
Sort, filter by condition, AutoFilter
Database functions for sum, average, variance, etc.

No ANOVA, regression analysis, t tests, correlation, etc.? No pivot tables? That's most of what I find Excel useful for!

Hopefully someone can tell me I'm wrong and that these features are included.

How does OpenOffice compare in terms of data analysis? (I've <gasp> never used it).

Re:data analysis lacking?

[Jody Goldberg]

If you're looking for analysis tools in a spreadsheet Gnumeric has alot to offer. Here's a screen shot of just some of the available utilities. The additional worksheet functions (above and beyond MS Excel) are also quite useful.

For PocketPC too!

[xaqar]

Don't miss the Pocket PC version as well! It supports everything that the desktop version does, unlike MS's own Pocket Excel, which barely does anything!

Sales Pitch?

[CodeMonkey4Hire]

I noticed that Martin Kotulla's "email" address is http://www.softmaker.de. Doesn't that make this an unabashed sails pitch to /. users?

We Don't Need Another Spreadsheet

[theManInTheYellowHat]

We need to be able to edit Flash files, edit Movies, make better websites.

Microsoft Office has been done, done to death, and the resounding tone is that there is precious little inovation left to do. Macromedia, Adobe and Apple are making the software that needs to run on Linux box.

Honestly with OpenOffice, gnumeric and kspread what else do you need for a spreadsheet?

Wordart in Excel BFD. Garageband, Premeire, Flash MX, Dreamweaver, FinalCut.....

Not JUST 'pre-windows95'...

[RLiegh]

but pre patents, dmca and the complete entrenchment of MS.

Your analogy doesn't fit because you're talking about a time when the marketplace supported the concept of alternatives; but these days, they only want one solution: and that solution is microsoft.

Uh, from someone who actually is trying it . . .

[Idou]

it seems pretty quick (especially when comparing it to OO 1.1, I suppose that is because it is just a spreadsheet program). And it seems to open xls files as quick as Excel.

Seems to be in a niche between OO which allows you to save to xls and gnumeric, which I didn't think allowed you to save to xls format but is very light and quick.

Oh, and it seems to support OO's calc format.

No, maybe it will not save the world, but it just may help a handful more people move to Linux and reward a commericial developer for supporting Linux. Though, I am sure it is not for EVERYONE.

Weak charting

[Jody Goldberg]

Gnumeric is admittedly still pretty weak on the charting side. However, things are improving quickly. Please file a few feature requests to help guide things. 1.3.x has support for error bars now (still need to hook up the xls import for that) and the polar (what xl calls radar) plot engine is in place too. My short term goals are to extend the axis mapping support, and add a gnuplotish implicit iterator feature that is not in XL.

Unfortunately...

[H4x0r Jim Duggan]

It looks like they've also cloned Excels license and distribution terms.

Gnumeric and OpenOffice.org Calc will do me just fine.

Re:Unfortunately...

[martin-k]

No, in fact we haven't.

It's commercial software, I need to make payroll every month. If you can get over this fact, the rest is really lenient. Remember Philippe Kahn's "just like a book" license? That's what our license is modeled after -- install on as many machines as you like, but only use as many copies concurrently as you have licenses.

If "free" is what you are after, get ahold of a copy of SUSE Linux 9.1. It ships with TextMaker Free Edition and PlanMaker Free Edition.

256 columns

[Jody Goldberg]

This has been supported for quite some time as a compile time option. The 256 is maintained as the default for XL compatibilty.

RTFA please..Re:Another "Will Not Succeed" project

[advocate_one]

You are a twit... would you like to try reading the F'ing article next time... Planmaker for MS-Windows already exists and is refered to on their webpage... but I can't give you the precise link 'cos the site's been slashdotted... Here's the griff from the google cache of their home page

SoftMaker is dedicated to creating office productivity software for popular operating systems, including Windows, Windows CE, and Linux.

Our current English-language products comprise TextMaker and PlanMaker, a word processor and a spreadsheet for Windows, Linux, Pocket PCs, and Handheld PCs, and MegaFont XXL, a 10,000-fonts typeface library for Windows, Linux, and OS/2.

I'm part of the public beta program for the Linux versions and am a happy customer using the Linux version of Textmaker.

Also Softmaker are perfectly happy sticking to the English and European markets... they're obviously doing well as they're still in existence after several years.

chart import

[Jody Goldberg]

This is still not to the point where'd I'd like it but it's no longer a bad joke (aka 1.0.x). Have you tried 1.2.x ? If there are still problems please submit samples it helps us to prioritize which areas to focus on. Thanks to the softmaker tests I just added xls import support for gradient backgrounds, things are starting to look reasonably pretty.

Re:Some of those tests are reasonable, many are no

[martin-k]

Jody: We grabbed nearly all test files from the web. These are actual files that ordinary users have created and that were available for download at some place, and we used them to hone our Excel import filters for PlanMaker.

The problem is usually not files that have only been edited in one version of Excel, but went through different versions and service packs of Excel, OpenOffice, Gnumeric, whatever. Maybe the files are not valid anymore according to the "official" specs, but as long as Excel (and PlanMaker) read them and display them correctly, they _are_ correct for the regular user.

P.S.: I still have that e-mail from you in my box. Sorry for not getting back sooner...

Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH

Gnumeric can export to xls.

[Jody Goldberg]

We've support XL95 and XL 97/2k/XP for quite a while.

Re:Another "Will Not Succeed" project

[_xeno_]

1) *nix only. That doesn't sell copies, since everyone else is using Windows. This is the #1 way to cut out a gigantic market demographic for software developers these days, especially when we're talking about desktop software.

Actually, if you looked at the very top of the page, you'd notice that Slashdot only linked to the Linux beta page. There's a Windows version, plus a PocketPC version, and a Handheld PC version (whatever "handheld PC" means - I could only pull up the linked page, after that, the site died).

Of course, as to whether or not this will succeed - who knows. There probably is a market for 100% feature-complete Excel clone that runs on multiple platforms. You wouldn't believe how much Excel gets used in the buisness world - I've seen it used as a database before! It gets used a lot as a very powerful and very easy to use data storage and presentation tool. Plus the VBScript macros are very powerful - if a little on the slow side and annoying to write.

I'm currently writing an application in Excel. No, seriously. I'd rather use something else. (Anything else!) But the client wants to add some code to an existing Excel spreadsheet to get some added functionality. VBScript and Windows Forms allows me to do that job with just Excel. Of course, this ties the customer to Excel and Windows - giving them another option in the future that's cheaper than the Microsoft solution could very well gain customers.

Although I tend to agree - I doubt that this will have much effect against Microsoft or any of the other Linux spread sheets.

Re:Still Waiting on Solver

[Jody Goldberg]

Gnumeric has solver, goal seek, and iterative expressions.

xls is documented

[Jody Goldberg]

somewhat

It is a persistent untruth that there is no documentation for these vast binary blobs. MS itself published their internal docs as what I assume was filler material in the 'Excel 97 Developers kit' they were not complete, and have been known to contain errors or miss features. However they are a decent starting point. The OOo folk have also done a wonderful job of writing up the format. The vast majority of the work reading xls has nothing to do with deciphering the bits. The real issue is mapping or figuring out the datastructures that the format implies. If you can use an internal representation that mirrors MS XL import/export is trivial. When there is an impedence mismatch ... there is alot more work and bugs.

Re:Eastereggs

[Anonymous Coward]

I found one totally by accident. I don't have space in this comment to explain how to recreate it but it involves thousands of keystrokes and mouseclicks and takes hours to do. But if you do go through all that trouble, you will be rewarded with a colorful blue screen with wonderful white lettering that says IRQ_LESSTHAN_OR_EQ or something like that. I highly recommend it!

The Microsoft Language Project

[torpor]

This just goes to show you how pervasive Microsoft is; they're getting to be like Band-Aid and Vaseline - people refer to any adhesive bandange or petroleum jelly (respectively) using these brand names.

I believe, if you look closely and not always brashly at what you see, that Microsoft is a Master at language-control propaganda methods.

Microsoft "Windows", "Word", "Excel", "Passport". They have, using copyright/trademark registration backed up by the full force of the U.S. Government, usurped a significant chunk of the English dictionary and grafted their own contemporary definitions.

The "he inserted microsoft in the socket behind his ear" pun of Gibson&co. is a delicate stab at this issue, which has been ongoing for quite some time.

Software "registration" of common English words, and the commercialized property now granted as a result of it, is taking its toll on English as a language ... Microsoft aren't the only ones doing it, but from them you can learn -many- worthy things in this regard.

{I find this aspect of their 'leadership' of the computing industry to be detestable, and this is why I don't ever use Microsoft products. Ever.}

Re:Everything and more

[egarland]

Actually, I did mean unless you are MS. MS's software is concidered the default. They can claim that their software can't do everything other peoples does but is still better because it's ubiquitous which is an advantage by itself. MS's software can be worse but still perceived as the better option simply because it's MS's.

Linux fanboys can be annoying but I find MS fanboys much more annoying and there are a lot more of them, especially in IT management.

MS's software is often good (I use it constantly) but Linux's software is also good and has much more promise than the MS lock-in enabled stuff.

VBA scripting

[ion_]

I wonder if any non-Microsoft®Office® spreadsheet program supports VBA scripting? Being able to run such useful Excel® programs as Pacelman and Excellence would be very important for the FOSS community. Apparently there has been some effort to make a Visual® Basic® interpreter for Linux, but the project doesn't seem to have made any progress.

Moved to a different site

[martin-k]

OK, our hosting company cut us off because "some scripts were attacking our servers". When I told them about Slashdot, they never heard of the site. Oh well.

Currently, I have moved things to:

Main page
PlanMaker for Linux page
Comparison page Excel, PlanMaker, OpenOffice.org

Let's see how quickly you slashdot those.

You cannot download the beta right now because the Python scripts point to softmaker.de which is currently no way. Just look at the pictures instead.

If someone wants to mirror us, please contact me at info (at) softmaker.de . Please. Pretty please.

Martin Kotulla SoftMaker Software GmbH

Re:"Excel-compatible charting"

[pyr0]

Not only is it a good thing, it's an absolutely *wonderful* thing. When you work with other people who use only MS Excel, and you exchange data and plots through spreadsheet files, a linux spreadsheet with _full_ compatibility is the holy grail. I've been struggling with this for at least three years now. Basically it came down to booting to windows so I could use Excel....not an optimal solution.

Microsoft is to benefit...

[aksansai]

Think about it. Microsoft now provides the benchmark by which all office suites are influenced by. Creating more ".xls" spreadsheets means that more people will need Microsoft Excel (or compatible office suites) to view, modify, etc. If a group makes a product that is marginally or significantly superior to Excel, Microsoft can than use their ideas to make Excel a better product.

This is why many companies like the idea of funding an open source project. There are millions of creative minds out there churning ideas that the relatively small development group of a commercial package has not even conjured. The practice of suing is not one widely performed by Microsoft, because they can afford to have competition that makes up less than a tenth of the market. Other companies like Apple, on the other hand, has such a small market (and stake) that they aggressively attempt to hoard their interests and ideas to prevent them from being used by others.

Does no one remember Lotus Improv, or Javelin?

[WillAdams]

Let us remember that Visicalc was modelled on the limitations of an accountant's ledger and the Apple ][ screen.

Let us _please_ move past that limitation --- you've got companies that have to _require_ that all ranges used for calculations (even of a single cell) are given names --- Lotus Improv w/ it's cool tear-off ``item dispenser'' instead required one name things as they were made, so that formulas read like:

profit = sales - expenses

Cloning is boring and uninteresting --- contrast LyX (http://www.lyx.org ) to Word for an example of how an opensource app can change the concept and do much better.

For those running Mac OS X, look up http://www.quantrix.com

For those w/ systems running NeXT or OPENSTEP, well, you've already got Lotus Improv or Quantrix already, right?

William

The only thing...

[Audacious]

The only thing these spreadsheets needs now is a compiler so you can quickly create a set of programs which use a spreadsheet-like interface.

Think of it - pre-defined variables (cA_1, cA_2, etc...), pre-defined functions, pre-defined graphic routines, pre-defined everything just about - except for the stuff written by the user. You don't have to worry about if the program will work or not on a given platform, you could do straight-line programming or oop programming, and displays are already standardized. They all look like spreadsheets. :-)

Re:65k row limit

[Morky]

That's hilarious you wrote that right after my comment. They have a 16k row limit, a la Excel '95. Give me Gnumeric any day over that.

Re:Row Limit

[martin-k]

The current limit of 16384 rows is not set in stone. We had PlanMaker builds with 65536 and 256K rows, but then some functions (like sorting whole columns) were too slow -- remember that we are also supporting Pocket PCs and Handheld PCs, and CPU-wise, they are at a i286 or i386 level.

As soon as we have optimized some of these routines, the row limit will be raised.

Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH

bad business plan

[hak1du]

It's commercial software, I need to make payroll every month.

So why do you pick a business plan as bad as creating an Excel clone? There are zillions of interesting software products you could make. But you pick a product that competes head-on with Microsoft and with open source software. Do what you like, but don't come around bellyaching later when your product fails; you will have neither Microsoft to blame, nor OSS, only yourself.

Re:bad business plan

[John Starks]

Gee, that's funny, I didn't realize that Microsoft and Open Source software had an Excel-compatible spreadsheet available for Linux!

Oh, they don't. This is a good business plan. Excel is very important to businesses, and this product will only make it easier for users to migrate to Linux on the desktop.

Idiot.

Re:bad business plan

[martin-k]

My company has been selling word processing, spreadsheet, typefaces, and database software in Germany since 1987. It's not like we just entered this business yesterday.

I never complain to anyone about failed business ventures and, besides, Slashdot probably wouldn't accept the story...

Martin Kotulla
SoftMaker Software GmbH

Re:Since 1987? Impressive.

[martin-k]

With 15 employees, we are much smaller than the better-known office suite manufacturers, and we have been concentrating exclusively on the German market till about 12 months ago. So, if you don't actively read German computer magazines, it would have been easy to miss us.

I have no problem competing with open source software, and authors of open source software usually don't have that towards commercial software. There is much more zealotry among the user base than under developers...

Martin Kotulla SoftMaker Software GmbH