Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

googledrive.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 230 posts

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#91

Post by owenwil »

gdulli wrote: post #24

I'm at my first company that uses Google apps and it's been a bad experience. There's so much about email and calendaring that Outlook/Exchange got right that it's hard to be without it after taking it for granted. Using a native rich application is always going to be superior to building a web app on top of a browser. Once you're used to real applications, Gmail and the other apps aren't suitable for anything more t…

That's interesting. We just went the opposite direction, from Office 365 to Google Apps and we couldn't be happier. Office365 was slow, riddled with issues and a poor experience for anyone who used a Mac. Literally awful; we often couldn't talk between offices on Lync because of "reasons" according to Microsoft.

Switching to Google was like a fresh breath of air.

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#93

Post by gdulli »

freyr wrote: post #72
mierle wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently went through an acquisition where we transitioned from Google Apps to the Microsoft suite. I do not share your love of Microsoft's suite. Among the many problems I have with the Microsoft suite, Outlook is at the top of my list for generating the most frustration. GMail's priority inbox and new-style inbox where machine learning is used to sort out mail is a productivity booster for me. With Outlook, I reg…

So, we all like what we're used to. To the OP, insisting that apps running in browsers will never match native apps in terms of UX, that's a very audacious claim. There are many powerful, competent, and well-funded entities with a vested interest in improving the web app experience (including Google). I wouldn't claim they're doomed from the start. This could be just another example of a disruptive technology, that's…

> There are many powerful, competent, and well-funded entities with a vested interest in improving the web app experience (including Google). I wouldn't claim they're doomed from the start.

I've been using gmail for almost 10 years. I liked it from the start. But it's getting worse, not better. It's extremely slow compared to what I'm used to with Exchange and Outlook, and navigating around is more of a chore. How do I, for example, see who's in on an email list? I can't just right-click on the name of the list and see the members? (And don't even get me started on the new compose experience mess.)

If Gmail was being continuously improved, I'd have a reason to be optimistic about it. I like being given free storage, but as far as usability goes, I have fonder memories of Eudora.

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#94

Post by Spearchucker »

selectnull wrote: post #33
gdulli wrote: post #24

I'm at my first company that uses Google apps and it's been a bad experience. There's so much about email and calendaring that Outlook/Exchange got right that it's hard to be without it after taking it for granted. Using a native rich application is always going to be superior to building a web app on top of a browser. Once you're used to real applications, Gmail and the other apps aren't suitable for anything more t…

I would agree with you that excel is still more powerful than google spreadsheet but I don't agree that's because of native vs web type of app, because gmail is more powerful (and faster) than outlook. So let's call it subjective and give it a rest. The main reason we switched to google apps is collaboration: all the features in the world do not really matter when the whole team can open and edit a document at the sa…

How is Gmail faster than Outlook? I've used both for as long as they've existed, and both for work and personal use, and don't see where or how Gmail is faster.

Not going to bother with the more powerful comment. This being HN and all I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're simply not familiar enough with Outlook, rather than trolling.

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#95

Post by bhouston »

gdulli wrote: post #93
freyr wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, we all like what we're used to. To the OP, insisting that apps running in browsers will never match native apps in terms of UX, that's a very audacious claim. There are many powerful, competent, and well-funded entities with a vested interest in improving the web app experience (including Google). I wouldn't claim they're doomed from the start. This could be just another example of a disruptive technology, that's…

> There are many powerful, competent, and well-funded entities with a vested interest in improving the web app experience (including Google). I wouldn't claim they're doomed from the start. I've been using gmail for almost 10 years. I liked it from the start. But it's getting worse, not better. It's extremely slow compared to what I'm used to with Exchange and Outlook, and navigating around is more of a chore. How do…

Gmail UI sucks in part because they are going for the masses, not the power user. It isn't HTML5's fault.

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#96

Post by tidon12 »

alexman wrote: post #43
nailer wrote: post #27

Can we insert rows normally now? In a discoverable, intuitive way, like Edit -> Insert rows used in every other spreadsheet ever? Currently the solution is this: https://support.google.com/drive/answer/44684?hl=en Eg, to add 30 rows, select 30 random rows, no matter what they are, as long as your selection is 30 high. Then you right click the row area, you get the option to insert 30 rows. Who does UX for these produ…

The one thing that really annoys me is that they don't have a keyboard shortcut for adding a new row. Now I always have to 1) Shift space to select the current row 2) Press the "right-click" button the keyboard 3) Press the down arrow 4 times to select "Insert 1 above" 4) Press enter Or else I've to use the mouse, which is equally slow. It's really silly given that how often people insert rows.

Insert row is: 1) Shift + space (highlight current row) 2) alt + I (open insert menu) 3) r (insert row above)

vs Excel which is: 1) Shift + space (highlight current row) 2) ctrl + shift + "+" (insert row above)

Slightly different key pattern, but it does exist. Difference probably exist b/c ctrl + "+" is reserved in the browser for zoom.

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#97

Post by ChuckMcM »

gdulli wrote: post #85
ChuckMcM wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They (Google Apps, and Office) are different. People who cannot take the time to adapt to different will always find the 'other' system inferior to the one they know.

That's very specious to claim that's why someone would disagree with you, but I didn't have an opinion about Google Apps at first. It was only after spending a year using it and learning its differences and limitations that I thought it was inferior. As a software developer for 15+ years, learning new applications is not a difficult thing.

Fair enough. This is how I reason to that particular statement. My observation is that the judgment of 'superior' or 'inferior' requires a standard. In the absence of an unbiased exemplar, the first exposure and use becomes the 'default' standard. Further, that exposure tunes the work flow to minimize 'pain' which creates a pattern of behavior that achieves an objective at reduced pain (a trained workflow).

On the exposure to a new system, the combination of using the previous system as the default exemplar, and using the trained work flow that the previous system encouraged, results in the second system being rated 'inferior' to the extent that it does not exactly duplicate specific characteristics or support exactly similar workflow.

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#98

Post by Thrymr »

freyr wrote: post #72
mierle wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently went through an acquisition where we transitioned from Google Apps to the Microsoft suite. I do not share your love of Microsoft's suite. Among the many problems I have with the Microsoft suite, Outlook is at the top of my list for generating the most frustration. GMail's priority inbox and new-style inbox where machine learning is used to sort out mail is a productivity booster for me. With Outlook, I reg…

So, we all like what we're used to. To the OP, insisting that apps running in browsers will never match native apps in terms of UX, that's a very audacious claim. There are many powerful, competent, and well-funded entities with a vested interest in improving the web app experience (including Google). I wouldn't claim they're doomed from the start. This could be just another example of a disruptive technology, that's…

Some of us don't like any of the current alternatives.

In my opinion Gmail beats Outlook for mail, but Google apps are not really enterprise-ready for calendar and docs. Editing a document offline is not a feature that should just now be becoming sort of usable, it should have been fundamental from the beginning. Confusion between Google Apps and personal Google logins is common. Managing a Google calendar is painful, and basically has not improved at all in years.

I have no desire to go back to using Office for everything, but I have very little confidence that Google is actually going to spend much effort in getting things right for these use cases either.

Re: New Google Sheets: faster, more powerful, and works offline

#100

Post by sliverstorm »

oftenwrong wrote: post #52
gdulli wrote: post #24

I'm at my first company that uses Google apps and it's been a bad experience. There's so much about email and calendaring that Outlook/Exchange got right that it's hard to be without it after taking it for granted. Using a native rich application is always going to be superior to building a web app on top of a browser. Once you're used to real applications, Gmail and the other apps aren't suitable for anything more t…

>Using a native rich application is always going to be superior to building a web app on top of a browser. Always? You think that will be true 20 years from now?

One thing that isn't going away in twenty years (or probably ever)- the speed of light. There is a hard limit on how fast latency can get.
Post reply on HN