Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations strongm on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
is Lotus 123 Release 5 compatible with Windows 2000??? 9
- Thread starter briandoc
- Start date
DaveGoTech
Programmer
If I recall, 123 R5 is dos-based. Correct? Turns-out Win2K, unlike Win95/98, is not. There is a DOS emulator program included with WIN2k (Command Prompt), but it does not run many of the more complicated dos-based application programs. I think your only work-around is to find something else (Excel?) to use.
Guest_imported
New member
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
For the Record: 1) Lotus 123 Release-5 is NOT DOS-based - it IS a genuine Windows application. 2) Lotus 123 Release-5 remains the product of choice amongst "power spreadsheet users" simply because it remains THE BEST PROGRAMMING TOOL on the market - to this day. The reason ? - because it contains THE BEST programming language (bar none). The Lotus "macro" language in Relase-5 is FAR SUPERIOR to Visual Basic (Excel) and Lotus Script (which is primarily a clone of Visual Basic. Prediction: Lotus/IBM will soon release a "next generation" spreadsheet which will include a "compiler". They will likely purchase "Visual Baler", an existing spreadsheet compiler which has some bugs, eliminate those bugs and regain their position as NUMBER ONE SPREADSHEET IN THE WORLD. ...Dale Watson
-
1
- Thread starter
- #5
Well, on my own I've figured out the following:
123R5 is not so much incompatible with Win2K, as it is incompatible with a Win2K install that has the Novell Client for NT loaded. No Novell client = no problems. Novell client loaded = headaches!
That's been my experience thus far.
123R5 is not so much incompatible with Win2K, as it is incompatible with a Win2K install that has the Novell Client for NT loaded. No Novell client = no problems. Novell client loaded = headaches!
That's been my experience thus far.
- Thread starter
- #7
I've been researching this for quite some time and can't come up with a fix to the Win2K/Novell problem as of yet. Right now, we can't get rid of the client either for the time being. Novell's site doesn't even seem to acknowledge the problem. Only Lotus' knowledge base has any references to the Novell tie-in to the problem. Please post something here if you learn anything new, and I'll do the same. Good luck!
Guest_imported
New member
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
I think I found one solution to the Novell problem. If you have PCAnywhere installed uninstall it and it should work.
My problem was that I got a new computer last week with Windows 2000 and I was having performance problems with Lotus 5.0. Whenever I loaded more than 3 spreadsheets, it took 30 seconds just to change the column width one character. The same went for exiting out of the files. Everything was slowed down about 50 times. I went over to a friends work and installed Lotus on a machine without the Novell client. It worked fine. Then I talked to the IT Manager at my organization and he remembered a Novell techdoc on PCAnywhere and suggested that I uninstall it. I did and now Lotus works fine.
If you have PCAnywhere, try uninstalling it and see if that makes a difference. I'm curious to see if that is the main problem everyone is having.
My problem was that I got a new computer last week with Windows 2000 and I was having performance problems with Lotus 5.0. Whenever I loaded more than 3 spreadsheets, it took 30 seconds just to change the column width one character. The same went for exiting out of the files. Everything was slowed down about 50 times. I went over to a friends work and installed Lotus on a machine without the Novell client. It worked fine. Then I talked to the IT Manager at my organization and he remembered a Novell techdoc on PCAnywhere and suggested that I uninstall it. I did and now Lotus works fine.
If you have PCAnywhere, try uninstalling it and see if that makes a difference. I'm curious to see if that is the main problem everyone is having.
Guest_imported
New member
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
I hope this solution will solve everyone's problem with Lotus 1-2-3 Release 5 on Windows 2000 SP1 running Novell Client 4.8 for Windows NT/2000. I had no problem installing Lotus 1-2-3 R5W, nor running it once. However, when a user closed and re-opened Lotus 1-2-3, it caused a general protection fault (GPF) in one of the DLL files. The first solution was to reboot, but that took too long. Then I discovered that Windows 2000 runs wowexec.exe in the background in order to run Lotus 123 r5w. When the user closed Lotus, wowexec.exe remained running in the background. With wowexec.exe running in the background, a subsequent start-up of Lotus would cause the GPF. I verified this by ending the wowexec.exe process through the task list manager, and restarting Lotus. So, the next thing to do was to find a way so that it would not be necessary for a user to end the wowexec.exe process manually. So, the solution is as follows:
1. Login as the administrator or as a user who is part of the administrator group.
2. Run regedit.
3. Traverse all the way down to:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WOW
4. Look for the entry DefaultSeparateVDM, and change it to yes.
5. Close the registry editor.
After changing that parameter, Lotus 123 worked fine! No problems.
I think, and hope, that this will solve the PCAnywhere problem as well. If it does, please be kind to post your findings here. Thank you!
~ henry ~
1. Login as the administrator or as a user who is part of the administrator group.
2. Run regedit.
3. Traverse all the way down to:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\WOW
4. Look for the entry DefaultSeparateVDM, and change it to yes.
5. Close the registry editor.
After changing that parameter, Lotus 123 worked fine! No problems.
I think, and hope, that this will solve the PCAnywhere problem as well. If it does, please be kind to post your findings here. Thank you!
~ henry ~
-
2
- #11
DaleWatson123321
Programmer
Don,
The "short" answer is simply "NO". But I expect you ALSO want to know HOW it is DIFFERENT ?
I invite others who have used Smartsuite 97 extensively to express any potential benefits of Smartsuite 97 over Lotus Release 5.0. However, don't be surprised to find that there are MANY Lotus Release 5.0 users who have purposely decided to REMAIN with Release 5.0 because of TWO PRIMARY REASONS.
1) The basic "look and feel" of the Smartsuite 97 version of Lotus 123 is simply NOT as simple and easy to use as Release 5.0. It appears that an attempt was made to "convert" the appearance of Lotus 123 into more of an "Excel look-a-like". Longtime Lotus 123 users can easily point to the MANY SIGNIFICANT reasons why Lotus 123 had ALWAYS been a FAR SUPERIOR product than Excel. And, Lotus Release 5.0 STILL IS a FAR SUPERIOR product than even the current-day version of Excel.
2) The second Primary Reason... In attempting to follow Microsoft, Lotus/IBM made a VERY FATEFULL and VERY DISASTROUS decision - to TERMINATE development of Lotus 123's (WONDERFUL, EASY-TO-USE, and POWERFUL) programming language, in favor of adopting Microsoft's "VISUAL BASIC" programming language. It is my understanding that this action was taken starting with Smartsuite 97, and that Lotus 123's "Lotus Script" is really a clone of "Visual Basic".
Don, I suggest the reason why MANY Lotus 123 Release 5.0 users are sticking with Release 5.0 - and thus their questions about compatibility problems with later versions of Windows - is largely because of the above 2 points.
But, in order for you and others to better understand the SIGNIFICANCE of these points, allow me to be more specific about Lotus 123 Release 5.0's TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE over Microsoft's Excel.
Lotus 123's programming language was crafted in such a fashion that it was a "REAL BREAKTHROUGH" in terms of it being a POWERFUL, YET EASY-TO-USE programming language. Not only was this language EXTREMELY EASY to use, but it ALSO permitted easy-to-use "INTERACTIVITY" with the spreadsheet data and the built-in spreadsheet functions. In short, it was THE VERY BEST "programming tool" for "application development" - at least for small and medium-sized applications. And, for larger applications which would require huge database interactivity, Lotus 123 Release 5.0 was also VERY capable of being a "front-end" for such larger applications, wherein Lotus 123 could be used for data-gathering and report-generation for these large databases.
Interesting point - In spite of Lotus 123 Release 5.0's programming language being SO APPEALING because of its combined "Power" and "Ease-Of-Use", Lotus Corporation (now IBM) never gave it a NAME. To this day, it still officially remains "nameless". By default, the name that this very powerful language acquired, was simply "macros". To make matters worse, other software ALSO used the same "generic" term of "macros", and in these other cases, the term "macro" referred primarily to very "simple" procedures. This, in turn, caused many to "overlook" this EXTREMELY POWERFUL programming language.
A couple of years ago, I decided to do what Lotus Corporation FAILED to do - give this wonderful language a name. I decided to adopt the name "SNAP" - which stands for "Super Natural Application Programming". And, of course, using this language, it is certainly a real "snap" to develop applications, ESPECIALLY when compared to Microsoft Excel and their "VISUAL BASIC".
Visual BASIC, while perhaps powerful, is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to learn and use. It is SO difficult to work with, as compared to "SNAP", that Visual BASIC is effectively "NOT EVEN IN THE SAME LEAGUE" - and it makes Excel VERY INFERIOR.
Why am I so convinced of the difference between "SNAP" and Visual Basic ? Here's why…
For several years, I had been developing major applications using Lotus 123 and always wondered why no one had developed comparable applications using Excel. And this STILL applies to this day. For example I have developed a MAJOR Estimating program using Lotus 123 Release 5.0, and I have yet to see any sign of a comparable product on the Internet.
And, for the past couple of years, since my employer adopted Microsoft Office, I have: 1) worked with "Visual Basic graduates" and 2) developed applications using Visual Basic. From both these vantage points, I learned first hand that INDEED there is NO comparison - "SNAP" is EXCEEDINGLY EASIER to learn and use. And, indeed, "power" and "ease-of-use" are an AWESOME combination. I witnessed first hand, the Visual Basic graduates REALLY STRUGGLE to re-create applications I had ALREADY created in Lotus 123, and I had done so in CONSIDERABLY LESS time.
Longtime programmers who know and use the programming language "C" or "C++" will tell you that if you want PURE POWER, then "C" is THE BEST. Actually, I understand that the later versions of Lotus 123 were written in "C". Perhaps with such applications as developing "software" like Lotus 123, pure power IS important. However, with other "general application development", POWER is not ALL that is important - EASE-OF-USE is ALSO very important. Visual BASIC users look at "C", and say that Visual BASIC is FAR easier. I look at Visual BASIC as compared to Lotus 123's "SNAP", and say that "SNAP" is to Visual BASIC what Visual BASIC is to "C".
Lotus Corporation therefore simply "SHOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT" by adopting Microsoft's programming language of Visual Basic. As mentioned, Lotus Corporation included "Lotus Script" in Smartsuite 97, and apparently is very much a "clone" of Visual Basic.
Then, to make matters EVEN WORSE, Lotus Corporation (now IBM) made a COLOSSUL mistake in the mid-1990's of NOT purchasing the rights to a product called "VISUAL BALER" (not to be confused with Visual BASIC).
"Visual BALER" is a product which first surfaced as a DOS-based "spreadsheet compiler". And as a DOS-based compiler, it worked EXTREMELY well. It adopted Lotus 123's macro (SNAP) language and "enhanced" it with several important extra functions and PROTECTION features that had been and are STILL severely lacking in Lotus 123.
One of the major "selling features" advertised by Baler Corporation, was that their "enhanced" version of Lotus 123's "SNAP" programming language was SO easy to use, that NON-PROGRAMMERS would be very capable of developing applications. In other words, this software would appeal to the "general population" and not just to "career programmers".
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that the world is STILL searching for computer software with which they can develop applications for personal or office use WITHOUT having to "drop their day job" to become a CAREER PROGRAMMER.
After Windows surfaced in the early 1990's, Baler Corporation attempted to convert their DOS-based product over to a Windows-based product. They did create a product (latest version being "Visual BALER 2.5"
, but unfortunately it is full of too many bugs to be useful for most meaningful or "heavy-duty" applications. It is specifically because of these bugs that the product never gained acceptance and it forced Baler Corporation into bankruptcy.
The product was later purchased by "Patin and Associates" and is still available over the Internet, but I don't expect it is attracting too many takers.
About nine months to a year ago, a "financial backer" apparently contributed some dollars to hire a group of four programmers to investigate the possibility of "refitting" Visual Baler and converting it into a 32-bit application. I have not yet heard of any outcome.
My final point… The computer world needs a POWERFUL AND EASY-TO-USE "general purpose", "application development tool", and it ALSO needs a "spreadsheet compiler" to permit the creation of "stand-alone" applications. The most obvious solution to these needs, is a "merger" of the Lotus 123 spreadsheet together with the "SNAP-enhanced" language of Visual BALER.
At one point, Lotus Corporation, according to a former Baler Corporation programmer, was intimidated by the threat posed by Visual BALER. Lotus seemingly was concerned that potential Lotus 123 purchasers would be able to purchase "customized" spreadsheets developed in Visual BALER instead of purchasing Lotus 123. This was plain short-sightedness. What Lotus failed to appreciate, is that these customized applications would NOT replace the need for spreadsheet users to have Lotus 123 for development of their own "general purpose" applications.
Furthermore, Lotus Corporation failed to appreciate that tremendous "royalties" could have been earned from small and large application developers. These developers, myself included, would be more than willing to pay Lotus Corporation for each of the "customized" products developed and sold using this new "duo" combination of Lotus 123 and Visual BALER.
My hope is that IBM executives will "tune in" to this "ground level" conversation over what is REALLY happening at "ground zero". If they TRULY "tune in" to the points raised here, I am optimistic that our NEW MILLENNIUM will soon see the development of "spreadsheet based" application-development-software like a "Lotus 123 SNAP/Compiler Edition" which will be "hotly" embraced by the "general public" as well as career programmers. This indeed has the potential to enable Lotus/IBM to re-take the lead in the sale of spreadsheet / application development software.
Regards, …Dale Watson dwatson@home.com -or- dwatson@bsi.gov.mb.ca
The "short" answer is simply "NO". But I expect you ALSO want to know HOW it is DIFFERENT ?
I invite others who have used Smartsuite 97 extensively to express any potential benefits of Smartsuite 97 over Lotus Release 5.0. However, don't be surprised to find that there are MANY Lotus Release 5.0 users who have purposely decided to REMAIN with Release 5.0 because of TWO PRIMARY REASONS.
1) The basic "look and feel" of the Smartsuite 97 version of Lotus 123 is simply NOT as simple and easy to use as Release 5.0. It appears that an attempt was made to "convert" the appearance of Lotus 123 into more of an "Excel look-a-like". Longtime Lotus 123 users can easily point to the MANY SIGNIFICANT reasons why Lotus 123 had ALWAYS been a FAR SUPERIOR product than Excel. And, Lotus Release 5.0 STILL IS a FAR SUPERIOR product than even the current-day version of Excel.
2) The second Primary Reason... In attempting to follow Microsoft, Lotus/IBM made a VERY FATEFULL and VERY DISASTROUS decision - to TERMINATE development of Lotus 123's (WONDERFUL, EASY-TO-USE, and POWERFUL) programming language, in favor of adopting Microsoft's "VISUAL BASIC" programming language. It is my understanding that this action was taken starting with Smartsuite 97, and that Lotus 123's "Lotus Script" is really a clone of "Visual Basic".
Don, I suggest the reason why MANY Lotus 123 Release 5.0 users are sticking with Release 5.0 - and thus their questions about compatibility problems with later versions of Windows - is largely because of the above 2 points.
But, in order for you and others to better understand the SIGNIFICANCE of these points, allow me to be more specific about Lotus 123 Release 5.0's TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE over Microsoft's Excel.
Lotus 123's programming language was crafted in such a fashion that it was a "REAL BREAKTHROUGH" in terms of it being a POWERFUL, YET EASY-TO-USE programming language. Not only was this language EXTREMELY EASY to use, but it ALSO permitted easy-to-use "INTERACTIVITY" with the spreadsheet data and the built-in spreadsheet functions. In short, it was THE VERY BEST "programming tool" for "application development" - at least for small and medium-sized applications. And, for larger applications which would require huge database interactivity, Lotus 123 Release 5.0 was also VERY capable of being a "front-end" for such larger applications, wherein Lotus 123 could be used for data-gathering and report-generation for these large databases.
Interesting point - In spite of Lotus 123 Release 5.0's programming language being SO APPEALING because of its combined "Power" and "Ease-Of-Use", Lotus Corporation (now IBM) never gave it a NAME. To this day, it still officially remains "nameless". By default, the name that this very powerful language acquired, was simply "macros". To make matters worse, other software ALSO used the same "generic" term of "macros", and in these other cases, the term "macro" referred primarily to very "simple" procedures. This, in turn, caused many to "overlook" this EXTREMELY POWERFUL programming language.
A couple of years ago, I decided to do what Lotus Corporation FAILED to do - give this wonderful language a name. I decided to adopt the name "SNAP" - which stands for "Super Natural Application Programming". And, of course, using this language, it is certainly a real "snap" to develop applications, ESPECIALLY when compared to Microsoft Excel and their "VISUAL BASIC".
Visual BASIC, while perhaps powerful, is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to learn and use. It is SO difficult to work with, as compared to "SNAP", that Visual BASIC is effectively "NOT EVEN IN THE SAME LEAGUE" - and it makes Excel VERY INFERIOR.
Why am I so convinced of the difference between "SNAP" and Visual Basic ? Here's why…
For several years, I had been developing major applications using Lotus 123 and always wondered why no one had developed comparable applications using Excel. And this STILL applies to this day. For example I have developed a MAJOR Estimating program using Lotus 123 Release 5.0, and I have yet to see any sign of a comparable product on the Internet.
And, for the past couple of years, since my employer adopted Microsoft Office, I have: 1) worked with "Visual Basic graduates" and 2) developed applications using Visual Basic. From both these vantage points, I learned first hand that INDEED there is NO comparison - "SNAP" is EXCEEDINGLY EASIER to learn and use. And, indeed, "power" and "ease-of-use" are an AWESOME combination. I witnessed first hand, the Visual Basic graduates REALLY STRUGGLE to re-create applications I had ALREADY created in Lotus 123, and I had done so in CONSIDERABLY LESS time.
Longtime programmers who know and use the programming language "C" or "C++" will tell you that if you want PURE POWER, then "C" is THE BEST. Actually, I understand that the later versions of Lotus 123 were written in "C". Perhaps with such applications as developing "software" like Lotus 123, pure power IS important. However, with other "general application development", POWER is not ALL that is important - EASE-OF-USE is ALSO very important. Visual BASIC users look at "C", and say that Visual BASIC is FAR easier. I look at Visual BASIC as compared to Lotus 123's "SNAP", and say that "SNAP" is to Visual BASIC what Visual BASIC is to "C".
Lotus Corporation therefore simply "SHOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT" by adopting Microsoft's programming language of Visual Basic. As mentioned, Lotus Corporation included "Lotus Script" in Smartsuite 97, and apparently is very much a "clone" of Visual Basic.
Then, to make matters EVEN WORSE, Lotus Corporation (now IBM) made a COLOSSUL mistake in the mid-1990's of NOT purchasing the rights to a product called "VISUAL BALER" (not to be confused with Visual BASIC).
"Visual BALER" is a product which first surfaced as a DOS-based "spreadsheet compiler". And as a DOS-based compiler, it worked EXTREMELY well. It adopted Lotus 123's macro (SNAP) language and "enhanced" it with several important extra functions and PROTECTION features that had been and are STILL severely lacking in Lotus 123.
One of the major "selling features" advertised by Baler Corporation, was that their "enhanced" version of Lotus 123's "SNAP" programming language was SO easy to use, that NON-PROGRAMMERS would be very capable of developing applications. In other words, this software would appeal to the "general population" and not just to "career programmers".
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that the world is STILL searching for computer software with which they can develop applications for personal or office use WITHOUT having to "drop their day job" to become a CAREER PROGRAMMER.
After Windows surfaced in the early 1990's, Baler Corporation attempted to convert their DOS-based product over to a Windows-based product. They did create a product (latest version being "Visual BALER 2.5"
, but unfortunately it is full of too many bugs to be useful for most meaningful or "heavy-duty" applications. It is specifically because of these bugs that the product never gained acceptance and it forced Baler Corporation into bankruptcy.The product was later purchased by "Patin and Associates" and is still available over the Internet, but I don't expect it is attracting too many takers.
About nine months to a year ago, a "financial backer" apparently contributed some dollars to hire a group of four programmers to investigate the possibility of "refitting" Visual Baler and converting it into a 32-bit application. I have not yet heard of any outcome.
My final point… The computer world needs a POWERFUL AND EASY-TO-USE "general purpose", "application development tool", and it ALSO needs a "spreadsheet compiler" to permit the creation of "stand-alone" applications. The most obvious solution to these needs, is a "merger" of the Lotus 123 spreadsheet together with the "SNAP-enhanced" language of Visual BALER.
At one point, Lotus Corporation, according to a former Baler Corporation programmer, was intimidated by the threat posed by Visual BALER. Lotus seemingly was concerned that potential Lotus 123 purchasers would be able to purchase "customized" spreadsheets developed in Visual BALER instead of purchasing Lotus 123. This was plain short-sightedness. What Lotus failed to appreciate, is that these customized applications would NOT replace the need for spreadsheet users to have Lotus 123 for development of their own "general purpose" applications.
Furthermore, Lotus Corporation failed to appreciate that tremendous "royalties" could have been earned from small and large application developers. These developers, myself included, would be more than willing to pay Lotus Corporation for each of the "customized" products developed and sold using this new "duo" combination of Lotus 123 and Visual BALER.
My hope is that IBM executives will "tune in" to this "ground level" conversation over what is REALLY happening at "ground zero". If they TRULY "tune in" to the points raised here, I am optimistic that our NEW MILLENNIUM will soon see the development of "spreadsheet based" application-development-software like a "Lotus 123 SNAP/Compiler Edition" which will be "hotly" embraced by the "general public" as well as career programmers. This indeed has the potential to enable Lotus/IBM to re-take the lead in the sale of spreadsheet / application development software.
Regards, …Dale Watson dwatson@home.com -or- dwatson@bsi.gov.mb.ca
Dale,
I have been using 1-2-3 since release 1a, but at a more basic accountants level. The question that I did not pose is if the Smartsuite 97 version will run on Win2k SP1 or, in the alternative, do I need to upgrade my 1-2-3 license in order to move to a Win2k PC.
Don
I have been using 1-2-3 since release 1a, but at a more basic accountants level. The question that I did not pose is if the Smartsuite 97 version will run on Win2k SP1 or, in the alternative, do I need to upgrade my 1-2-3 license in order to move to a Win2k PC.
Don
DaleWatson123321
Programmer
Don,
I'm afraid I can't offer any specifics on whether Smartsuite 97 will run without problems on Win2k SP1.
I have recently loaded Lotus 123 Release 5.0 on Windows Me, and it seems to be working without problem, but this of course doesn't help answer your question.
It should be possible to contact Lotus directly, or at least their HELP forum. However, I presume you might be apprehensive about asking Lotus whether you need to upgrade because they will possibly say "YES" REGARDLESS of whether it is actually required.
If you haven't already heard of the BEST "SEARCH ENGINE" on the Internet, I suggest you try "GOOGLE" - considered by most to be THE BEST. Using your current search engine, you should be able to locate "Google", and then install it.
Using Google, you can more easily locate other Lotus 123 users, who hopefully will be able to provide the specifics you require.
Regards, ...Dale Watson dwatson@bsi.gov.mb.ca
I'm afraid I can't offer any specifics on whether Smartsuite 97 will run without problems on Win2k SP1.
I have recently loaded Lotus 123 Release 5.0 on Windows Me, and it seems to be working without problem, but this of course doesn't help answer your question.
It should be possible to contact Lotus directly, or at least their HELP forum. However, I presume you might be apprehensive about asking Lotus whether you need to upgrade because they will possibly say "YES" REGARDLESS of whether it is actually required.
If you haven't already heard of the BEST "SEARCH ENGINE" on the Internet, I suggest you try "GOOGLE" - considered by most to be THE BEST. Using your current search engine, you should be able to locate "Google", and then install it.
Using Google, you can more easily locate other Lotus 123 users, who hopefully will be able to provide the specifics you require.
Regards, ...Dale Watson dwatson@bsi.gov.mb.ca
-
1
- #14
Hopefully this helps - from the MS Win2K Software compatibility engine...
Says that 123 97 is Windows 2000 (pro) compatible.
Says that 123 97 is Windows 2000 (pro) compatible.
DaleWatson123321
Programmer
Thanks for your info, Ganners !!!
...Dale Watson dwatson@bsi.gov.mb.ca
...Dale Watson dwatson@bsi.gov.mb.ca
Guest_imported
New member
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
Jadar,
You're last post said the re-install the client after the install of 123......what if 123 was installed first? And it wasn't working then either? The seperate memory space thing doesn't seem to work either
You're last post said the re-install the client after the install of 123......what if 123 was installed first? And it wasn't working then either? The seperate memory space thing doesn't seem to work either
Guest_imported
New member
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
I know this thread is probably dead, and no one will ever read what I write, but... I've programmed in good old ANSI C, as well as Visual Basic. C is easier. C is easier because it easier to read, makes more sense, and good, solid, thorough documentation is available via UNIX man pages. As to Lotus vs. MS; well, if you have to pay for software that is bad, might as well go with MS as they are no worse than lotus and everyone has it.
DaleWatson123321
Programmer
"response to old post",
Surprise!!! Your posting IS being read - and just "seconds" after you posted it. Not bad, huh ?
Your perception seems good, though, that there appears to be not that many participants in this Lotus forum.
I find VERY interesting your comment about "C" actually being EASIER than Visual Basic. I certainly won't disagree with your point, as I don't know "C".
But I DO have "some" Visual Basic experience, and ALSO know that Lotus 123 itself was written in "C". The "original" versions were written in "Assembler", but Lotus Corp. later converted the code to "C".
If you've read the explanations I've made in this same thread, you'll see that the basic point I've been driving at is twofold:
1) The world NEEDS a SPREADSHEET COMPILER, and
2) The world NEEDS a programming language SPECIFICALLY for those who do NOT want to (and shouldn't need to) "drop their current career" and "set off to become a computer programmer". This is generally what one HAS to do in order to deal with the "level of complexity" of languages like "Visual Basic" AND "LotusScript" AND "C".
Regarding your last point - "As to Lotus vs. MS; well, if you have to pay for software that sucks, might as well go with MS as they suck no less than lotus and everyone has it."
You know what, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT !!!
BUT, here's the "key" point. Because they BOTH “suck”, is NOT reason enough to accept the "status quo" and simply go with the one which the (current) majority use.
The computer world obviously has NOT stood STILL, and we should EXPECT the "evolution" to continue.
I agree that the "spreadsheet world" seems to have been "neglected" somewhat - probably LARGELY due to Microsoft having "cornered the market". HOWEVER, ESPECIALLY because, as you said, their product ALSO "sucks", the world's PC users need to "keep hammering" (as best we can) to get through to those "at the top".
You probably have not experienced the EXTREMELY POWERFUL, YET EASY-TO-USE programming language of Lotus 123 Release 5 - which I refer to as "SNAP" (for Super Natural Application Programming). So let me assure you that I have on SEVERAL occasions been called on as a last resort to develop applications which other programmers "could NOT touch" without having to spend an ENORMOUS amount of time in comparison.
"C" and other languages are VERY POWERFUL, including "Assembler"! BUT if it takes an ENORMOUS amount of time and effort, then the primary areas for the use of these languages should be restricted to LARGE applications which warrant such a large commitment of time and resources - applications such as the creation of Lotus 123 itself. I'm not certain about Microsoft products, but I'd expect they too have been created with "C".
I hope I'm "getting through"... that what the world needs is an EASY-to-use, yet POWERFUL programming language... for smaller applications, AND for those who want to be able to develop their own applications WITHOUT having to change careers and become a computer programmer. AND, of course, this type of language will also make career programmers MORE capable.
To “underscore” this point about “capability”, I’ll share this information. I am about to launch a product that I created in Lotus 123 Release 5. I’ve been scouring the Internet for products that compare, but NONE come even remotely close to the product I’ve developed. The industry where this product will be utilized has been “crying” for a product to “meet their expectations” for a considerable time, yet NO ONE has been able to “meet their needs”. Why ? …It’s NOT due to lack of potential revenue – the current best product sells for $7,000 US. The ONLY explanation I can come up with, is that other programmers have been “hampered” by using languages that are MUCH more difficult to work with, and therefore CANNOT achieve the same degree of “success” as with “SNAP”.
Yet, according to your assessment, Microsoft continues to "stick it to the world" (my interpretation) with a language (Visual Basic) which you describe as being MORE difficult than "C".
Obviously it's time for a change. A "perfect starting point" is to use the "SNAP" language, combined with the spreadsheet compiling ability of the product called "Visual Baler". These two products have ALREADY proven themselves to be EXTREMELY POWERFUL -AND- "EASY-TO-USE". If ONLY IBM had not “wasted their resources on converting to LotusScript”, and instead concentrated their resources on enhancements to “SNAP” and incorporation of Visual Baler, they ALREADY would have recaptured the world’s spreadsheet users.
As you, my friend said, I hope "someone out there" is listening !!!
Perhaps employees at IBM who are asked to "struggle" with "LotusScript" will happen to read this, and say, "wait a minute", this DOES make GOOD sense. And, I CAN do my part, by "firing off an email" to the top executives at IBM.
The "bottom line" appears to be, as with MOST LARGE Corporations, it is "next to impossible" to reach those at the top. So, IBM'ers, we the "little guys" could use your HELP !!!
So please "take up the challenge" ...and YOU, IBM and the WORLD will be MUCH better off in the end.
I'm not going to "hold my breath", BUT, if someone at IBM would like to "talk to me", I'm obviously quite willing to share some of my long-held beliefs and ideas that could be useful in the development of this "next generation software" for the world.
Regards, ...Dale Watson
HOME: nd.watson@shaw.ca
Surprise!!! Your posting IS being read - and just "seconds" after you posted it. Not bad, huh ?
Your perception seems good, though, that there appears to be not that many participants in this Lotus forum.
I find VERY interesting your comment about "C" actually being EASIER than Visual Basic. I certainly won't disagree with your point, as I don't know "C".
But I DO have "some" Visual Basic experience, and ALSO know that Lotus 123 itself was written in "C". The "original" versions were written in "Assembler", but Lotus Corp. later converted the code to "C".
If you've read the explanations I've made in this same thread, you'll see that the basic point I've been driving at is twofold:
1) The world NEEDS a SPREADSHEET COMPILER, and
2) The world NEEDS a programming language SPECIFICALLY for those who do NOT want to (and shouldn't need to) "drop their current career" and "set off to become a computer programmer". This is generally what one HAS to do in order to deal with the "level of complexity" of languages like "Visual Basic" AND "LotusScript" AND "C".
Regarding your last point - "As to Lotus vs. MS; well, if you have to pay for software that sucks, might as well go with MS as they suck no less than lotus and everyone has it."
You know what, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT !!!
BUT, here's the "key" point. Because they BOTH “suck”, is NOT reason enough to accept the "status quo" and simply go with the one which the (current) majority use.
The computer world obviously has NOT stood STILL, and we should EXPECT the "evolution" to continue.
I agree that the "spreadsheet world" seems to have been "neglected" somewhat - probably LARGELY due to Microsoft having "cornered the market". HOWEVER, ESPECIALLY because, as you said, their product ALSO "sucks", the world's PC users need to "keep hammering" (as best we can) to get through to those "at the top".
You probably have not experienced the EXTREMELY POWERFUL, YET EASY-TO-USE programming language of Lotus 123 Release 5 - which I refer to as "SNAP" (for Super Natural Application Programming). So let me assure you that I have on SEVERAL occasions been called on as a last resort to develop applications which other programmers "could NOT touch" without having to spend an ENORMOUS amount of time in comparison.
"C" and other languages are VERY POWERFUL, including "Assembler"! BUT if it takes an ENORMOUS amount of time and effort, then the primary areas for the use of these languages should be restricted to LARGE applications which warrant such a large commitment of time and resources - applications such as the creation of Lotus 123 itself. I'm not certain about Microsoft products, but I'd expect they too have been created with "C".
I hope I'm "getting through"... that what the world needs is an EASY-to-use, yet POWERFUL programming language... for smaller applications, AND for those who want to be able to develop their own applications WITHOUT having to change careers and become a computer programmer. AND, of course, this type of language will also make career programmers MORE capable.
To “underscore” this point about “capability”, I’ll share this information. I am about to launch a product that I created in Lotus 123 Release 5. I’ve been scouring the Internet for products that compare, but NONE come even remotely close to the product I’ve developed. The industry where this product will be utilized has been “crying” for a product to “meet their expectations” for a considerable time, yet NO ONE has been able to “meet their needs”. Why ? …It’s NOT due to lack of potential revenue – the current best product sells for $7,000 US. The ONLY explanation I can come up with, is that other programmers have been “hampered” by using languages that are MUCH more difficult to work with, and therefore CANNOT achieve the same degree of “success” as with “SNAP”.
Yet, according to your assessment, Microsoft continues to "stick it to the world" (my interpretation) with a language (Visual Basic) which you describe as being MORE difficult than "C".
Obviously it's time for a change. A "perfect starting point" is to use the "SNAP" language, combined with the spreadsheet compiling ability of the product called "Visual Baler". These two products have ALREADY proven themselves to be EXTREMELY POWERFUL -AND- "EASY-TO-USE". If ONLY IBM had not “wasted their resources on converting to LotusScript”, and instead concentrated their resources on enhancements to “SNAP” and incorporation of Visual Baler, they ALREADY would have recaptured the world’s spreadsheet users.
As you, my friend said, I hope "someone out there" is listening !!!
Perhaps employees at IBM who are asked to "struggle" with "LotusScript" will happen to read this, and say, "wait a minute", this DOES make GOOD sense. And, I CAN do my part, by "firing off an email" to the top executives at IBM.
The "bottom line" appears to be, as with MOST LARGE Corporations, it is "next to impossible" to reach those at the top. So, IBM'ers, we the "little guys" could use your HELP !!!
So please "take up the challenge" ...and YOU, IBM and the WORLD will be MUCH better off in the end.
I'm not going to "hold my breath", BUT, if someone at IBM would like to "talk to me", I'm obviously quite willing to share some of my long-held beliefs and ideas that could be useful in the development of this "next generation software" for the world.
Regards, ...Dale Watson
HOME: nd.watson@shaw.ca
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question