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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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".

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

[JanneM]

Like Gnumeric, you mean?

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

[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

[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

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.....

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.

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.

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.

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.}

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.

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: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