271–275 of 275 posts
This piece is worth reading, especially if you have said ever heard anyone utter a statement along the lines of “Libre Office does everything but Microsoft office can do“. I use and regularly contribute to Libre Office and haven’t used Microsoft office for years, but I am under no illusion that the former can replace the ladder in any corporation over 10 people or so. There are millions of business processes dependin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That makes two of us! I'm reworking the marketing and landing page, and I'm working on different stabs. There are two things to consider. First, I built a reactive document engine. Imagine Excel except instead of many very large grids, I have tables, objects, and single variables. Formulas can be attached any aspect to compute things reactivly, Second, I put that document within a NoSQL style platform such that sprea…
>My new marketing copy is going to start with "Unlock multiplayer super powers" - "Whether building a collaborative applicication or competitive game, the Adama platform will connect your people to global state and logic using a low latency edge network" Not that it matters, but, personally, I cannot understand anything in that sentence, nor most of what you have on your site. Maybe, just maybe, you could provide a c…
The big text: Unlock multiplayer superpowers in your software.
The small text: "Serverless" game hosting with enterprise ambitions to change the world. Adama is an open-source vertical web stack designed for board games, and the platform is a nuclear warhead of productivity when compared to traditional web stacks. Let's get shit done, today.
This is all above the fold.
The book was linked, and I just tested it. I'll make this more apparent. The link goes to https://book.adama-platform.com/what/post-hoc.html
Although, it seems like surge.sh has been having some issues lately.
I recently sat down and built something more complicated than simple accounting in a spreadsheet. It's what I considered to be a pretty typical usecase for a non-math related sheet; taking in several tables of data and selectively joining them. You enter an ID, press a button, and it finds all of the data related to that ID and presents it to you. I was horrified to find that even with the supporting scripting capabi…
Google Sheets is pretty basic compared to Excel in terms of the kinds of data analysis and queries it permits (without dropping into another language). Excel added tables over a decade ago that allow for some very useful and much cleaner query and data analysis stuffs in straight Excel. Then there are power queries and pivot tables, not sure how long those two have been around but last I used Google Sheets it had not…
I've used Google Sheets for years and greatly prefer it over Excel at this point. The killer feature is the sharing, which Excel does not do unless Microsoft 365 has greatly changed. The graphics, pivot tables, and functions are entirely sufficienty for cash flow and revenue models.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I mean, isn't this just a button that adds some named ranges for you? No, named ranges don't automatically expand when you add new rows, and they aren't automatically created when you add new columns. And they don't remain in groups, e.g. you can't make a reference like Namedrange1:Namedrange3, but in a table you can do Column1:Column3. Named ranges exist in a global namespace; column references exist in a per-table…
I'm happy that you like this syntax, but the claim you made was "no you fucking well cannot [do everything]", not "excel syntax is more fucking beautiful". I appreciate your advice, but I don't need to watch a video on R1C1 syntax, I literally maintain a spreadsheet :) It seems like your real claim is that you really like the way Excel does it, nobody can argue with that.
There's very little you can't do neatly and efficiently in Excel anymore. Yes you can in principle do those same things in Google Shets, but at what cost of readability?
I don't think it's worth spending much time getting into these arguments because the people arguing against Excel clearly don't know modern Excel very well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy that you like this syntax, but the claim you made was "no you fucking well cannot [do everything]", not "excel syntax is more fucking beautiful". I appreciate your advice, but I don't need to watch a video on R1C1 syntax, I literally maintain a spreadsheet :) It seems like your real claim is that you really like the way Excel does it, nobody can argue with that.
I have to agree with the OP (_dain_) here. Excel has evolved a lot in the last few years, first the whole Power Query and Power Pivot revolution and now all the functional stuff brought on by Simon Peyton-Jones and his crew like LET expressions and the functional constructs like LAMBDA, MAP, FILTER, ... There's very little you can't do neatly and efficiently in Excel anymore. Yes you can in principle do those same th…
That's not it at all. Excel has been in active development for over 30 years by a multi-trillion dollar development powerhouse with billions of sales, everybody is aware it's a perfectly competent product.
The dispute is the objective claim that it can do something that alternatives cannot, not the subjective claim that Excel is "neater", or more beautiful, or more user friendly. After 30 years of active development I would hope that Excel has some shortcuts, polish and syntax improvements to streamline common operations. That is not the same as not being able to do something.
I question the claim that it can do something unique, and want to hear an example. When pushed for an example I'm told that only Excel has a Solver, or only Excel has Pivot Tables. That is objectively false.
I don't want to hear about "Power Query" unless it's an example query that cannot be done in SQL. It's a proprietary query language, of course alternatives don't have it. I'm glad you're happy about it, but others might call that "Vendor Lock-in".