[Rhywun]

I understand that a lot of users here rely on complex formulas and macros--but honestly, in my almost ten years working in insurance I've dealt with a lot of Excel spreadsheets and none of them has contained anything more sophisticated than a SUM function; and not a single one has used macros. Frankly, I think those features aren't used by 99% of spreadsheet users (and that goes for Word macros, too). Anything more complicated gets pushed into a database anyway--and gives me more work /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif So... I think iWork is a great bargain at $79 that should satisfy most, but not all, users. I'll probably pick it up myself, as I switched to Mac last year at home, don't want to shell out hundreds of dollars for a sluggish MS Office, don't care for NeoOffice, and have been holding off for a better iWork.

[heisetax]

Quote:

---

In my opinion, your first look is only solidifying the idea that iWork is not meant to be a MS Office replacement, but rather a complement, depending on the kind of work you do.
In the past, if I do heavy page-layout stuff that I don't need to share with anyone, I will use Pages because it has the upper-hand in that arena. Similarly, I will use keynote if I know I can use my Mac to give a presentation and I really want to jazz it up. However, if compatibility with others is key, or I need to have certain advanced features (such as reviewing support, which Pages hasn't supported up until now), I use MS Office.
In the end, I like having both. And no, I won't be upgrading to Office 2008. Like so many others, the VBA Macro support is just too key to Microsoft Office for me to even think about purchasing a version that doesn't have it.

---

Was the lack of VBA used my MS to say that sales are down for MS Office 2008 for the Mac, thus we must end support? Or is the lack of VBA support just mean that the Mac version is ahead of the Windows version? This is after the common rumors is that this is the last Windows version that will have VBA support.
Like many I was hoping for something that would & could compete against MS Office. When all we are getting is an updated AppleWorks. That means for heavy use, we must use a full blown application, for small Mac only jobs we can use iWork. I just do not like to have to learn & use 2 applications for the same job. When & how big of a spreadsheet or letter do I switch to the full app? Also many of us must work in a cross-platform work place. Numbers is being touted to be able to work there. I guess others will have to prove that one to be true & not just more SJ sales hype.
Bill the TaxMan

[lkrupp]

" If you are not a regular spreadsheet user state that also. For small simple spreadsheets of of the infrequent spreadsheet user then you may be happy. I've just used Excel for too long."
That would be me. I know people use Excel for many different tasks. My oldest son is a structural engineer and uses it for finite element analysis. He also thinks the Mac version of Excel is woefully lacking. That's why I think its a mistake to compare Numbers with Excel. And as the writer of this article stated he had no trouble opening a large number of Excel spreadsheets and suspects that 99% of the stuff out there will too. Numbers will be quite sufficient for the vast majority of users and is a better choice than Excel for most too. And you simply can't beat the price.

[griffman]

I don't disagree with that statement at all. I'm clearly a non-typical Excel user, and stated as much in the First Look. I actually think this program is going to be quite successful, especially for those who found Excel intimidating. It's really simple to use, and it does the basics very well.
Since this was a First Look, the focus was really just on talking about some of the features. The review will get into the nitty gritty of performance, compatibility, missing features, cool stuff, etc.
-rob.

[griffman]

The stated reason for dropping VBA is that it was "too difficult" to do.
-rob.

[jscottk]

Macworld editors may have a long memory, but it certainly is a selective one. Perhaps you should go back through your own back issues (I'll give you a hint, try the late '80s) and look up a program by the name of Trapeze from Access Technology/DeltaPoint. Look familiar? It should. Numbers is a heck of a copy.
Don't get me wrong. I'm actually excited. Actual MAC NEWS! And it's something I actually need (and can afford)! I'm buying a copy tomorrow. But let's face facts. Numbers' entire mode of operation is a direct copy of Trapeze (luckily for us, a really good one). A free-form spreadsheet, you laid out (PageMaker style) independent/dependent spreadsheet blocks on a blank single/multiple pages and could add text, graphics, and charts (both 2D and 3D) however you wanted. It even did color! (OK, 8 colors. And you couldn't see them until you printed them with a color ribbon on your ImageWriter II dot matrix printer. This was the mid-'80s after all.) Trapeze ran rings around M$ Excel, in it's time (Excel v1.5, I still get nightmares), and could do math that still leaves the CURRENT version of Excel in the dust (aka arrays, vectors, and matrices - some of us are engineers, not accountants). It's a welcome update to, but still a blatant copy of Trapeze. And Trapeze came out 20 years ago!
Luckily for Apple, Trapeze's author is flattered. Otherwise, Apple could be in some (more?) legal trouble. (see http://thecodist.com...st/tag/trapeze)

[fds]

Quote:

---

I can see that there were unsupported formulas on my imported sheet, and that Numbers has converted those formulas to their last-calculated values. Thats great but which formulas from which cells? Without that information, Im forced to open the file in Excel and do a potentially painful cell-by-cell comparison.

---

Numbers also marks the individual problem cells with a blue warning triangle in the corner.
You can mouse over that to get more detailed info, such as which formula was unsupported.

[rwolfert]

We should all remember that this is Apple we're talking about. If there are some obvious features missing, I somehow doubt that they (the features in question) were too difficult to implement at this time. Rather, it seems more likely that the next update will add some (but not all) of those features that are ready, but for marketing reasons, were not included in the initial release. Why give it all away when minor upgrades keep the marketing machine going? And no one knows how to do it better than Apple. Likewise, major upgrades, with significant new features and capabilities, will bring in new revenue.
All in all, this (like the iPhone) is a great first step. If we know Apple, this will just keep getting better and better. Jobs & Co. seem to be the only ones who can outdo themselves.
Just my opinion.

[wuming]

Quote:

---

I've used Excel for over 22 years now & SuperCalc before that.

---

Did you really expect that Numbers 1.0 would fill in as an appropriate substitute?!?
I find such a thought even disturbing.

[griffman]

Well, given that I was still counting beans for IBM in the late 1980s, I was about as far from the Mac scense as possible -- so I'm not surprised I never heard of Trapeze /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif.
-rob.

[griffman]

"Numbers also marks the individual problem cells with a blue warning triangle in the corner.
You can mouse over that to get more detailed info, such as which formula was unsupported."
My apologies -- that's a major oversight on my part. I'll make sure we get an edit online ASAP. Thanks for catching that; now that I see it, I don't know how I overlooked it.
-rob.

[Thornnd]

Numbers looks visually stunning, but that's the least important aspect of a spreadsheet. The power is in it's ability to work with data. Tasks like performing advanced calculations, summarizing data, creating powerful charts (powerful != sexy), macros, and vertical or horizontal lookups are all key. I have yet to see another spreadsheet that handles text-to-columns or pivot tables as well as Excel. Unless your spreadsheet application can perform pivot operations, you shouldn't even bother comparing yourself to Excel.
Excel is butt-ugly and not always easy to use, but it works the data really well. The first thing I think when I see someone present a flashy spreadsheet is -- what are they trying to hide and why are they trying to distract me. Just show me your numbers -- everything else is fluff.

[griffman]

Very few "typical" spreadsheet users need pivot tables. Most just want what Numbers seems to deliver: the ability to do work with numbers and produce output that's easy to read, accurate, and nice looking.
I don't think Numbers is targeted at hard-core Excel users -- I'm pretty sure there's no pivot table feature, for instance. But neither was the spreadsheet in AppleWorks, and that package did very well for Apple over the years.
Just as with the prior version of Pages and Word, I think Apple has been careful not to come out with a direct replacement for Excel. There's room for both products in this market.
-rob.

[Adam_White]

Quote:

---

"Numbers also marks the individual problem cells with a blue warning triangle in the corner.
You can mouse over that to get more detailed info, such as which formula was unsupported."
My apologies -- that's a major oversight on my part. I'll make sure we get an edit online ASAP. Thanks for catching that; now that I see it, I don't know how I overlooked it.
-rob.

---

Rob - while you're at it you'll want to change your comment that Numbers has no OFFSET() function. It does. That is one of the first things that I looked for. I think the reason you got hung up is that Excel has two formats for the OFFSET() function and Numbers only has one.
Otherwise I 100% agree with your conclusions. I am an Accounting and Finance major and been using Excel (including Pivot Tables and Macros) for over 10 years and my first impression was "wow - this is better." 95% of Excel users should switch to Numbers if only because Office is so stinking expensive.