Gnumeric or Calc?
 

Which of these do you think is a better overall spreadsheet application? Which offers the most extensibility, best forumlæ library and stuff like that?

I know Gnumeric beats Calc in the startup and resources area (yeah, Calc tends to be a bit resource hungry, due to the integration with the rest of OOo), but I was wondering which offers the best performance and features as a spreadsheet?

Calc can be extended either with Macros, plugins or even [Java] applets, I'm not that familiar with Gnumeric to know if it is as extensible (or more) than Calc. I like both, and as of Calc 2.0.x they both pretty much support the same number of cells per sheet, is there anything one could do in Calc that is not possible in the other and vice versa?

TIA!

PS: I'm writing something about Linux and office productivity with the most common free and freely available packages for Linux (OOo, GNOME-Office, KOffice, etc), and I need to collect some more data, from users of these programs, I've got my opinion, but wnat to see others as well.

I use Calc when I have to do speadsheeting. I find that it does most things Microsoft Excel can. Also, using OpenDocument by default means that I will not have trouble opening my spreadsheets in years to come. Will "gnumeric" format be supported in 5 years when the taxman wants to audit me?

Calc also converts .xls to .ods and back almost flawlessly. Since Excel is the benchmark when it comes to spreadsheeting, this is very important.

--Ian

OpenOffice Calc was the first Linux spreadsheet I tried, I liked what I saw, and had no reason to look further. :) Anyway, I like the fact that it can read and open Excel documents, and it seems to support all the features I need. (I have not yet run into anything that I want it to do and cannot.)

macro support was my first consideration
 

When migrating to Linux, I had Lotus spreadsheet documents to convert. The main document made extensive use of macros and, in view of the number of data entries required, I wanted an automated document ready to go.

I had a quick look at gnumeric. It did not appear to have macro support, it was obviously not the main contender and I wondered whether it was more than just a spare time hobby for a desktop designer. I found out about kspread much later and the same comments apply.

I'd like Calc to be better, its macro tools to be more straightforward and better documented and formula functions more streamlined. But it does what I need; for me, there's no other option.

A complementary consideration. I use kde because it has three very good tools, at least one of which does not work properly on the gnome desktop. I have to put up with a lot for the sake of those tools. Similar comments probably apply to gnome. I hesitate to encourage either to divert from lifting their desktop game.

I think GNumeric also supports OpenDocument formats.

It's open source, so even if it isn't being supported you'll still have the information required to enable you to access the documents.

As far as I know gnumeric can save into .ods too (just like AbiWord can save into .odt)

One of the things that has always bothered me about Gnumeric is the handling of blank cells in formulae - they're treated as "1", whereas in Calc they're treated as "0". So if I have a formula that finds a weighted average or somesuch and a value is missing (implying zero in my mind), I have to manually enter "0" in Gnumeric.

Of course this is a matter for debate, as obviously different people feel strongly one way or the other. I believe Excel treats blank cells as 0, Quattro Pro as 1, so for compatibility reasons you might want to investigate this.

Calc is fine.

It handles XLS quite well, has many features, many features which Excel has as well, macros, in short a very good replacement for Excel.

But...

Try to make a graph of 3 colums x 512 rows. It takes 45 seconds to get a first graph and another 30 seonds for each redraw. In ver 1.1 that is. I haven't upgraded yet, because Debian want to upgrade another 500 packages when I do so, and that is what *I* do not want.

This behaviour is rediculous, and I have to switch to Gnumeric for these jobs.

Otherwise Calc is just fine.

jlinkels.

PS. Yes, I know, I love to use GnuPlot as well. Version 4.1 ;)

Ruby + Gnuplot

Do it once in a spreadsheet of your choice.

You might beat me if you are fast and good.

However, for all subsequent reruns of the data I will beat you totally.

@ciotog
> One of the things that has always bothered me about Gnumeric is the handling of blank cells in formulae - they're treated as "1", whereas in Calc they're treated as "0".
sorry for late reply ;-) but not to mislead others: spreadsheets don't account empty cells for some / most statistical functions, LO Calc as well as gnumeric, you might have been trapped by a feature in LO Calc displaying cells with result '0' as blank.

i use Calc, but only as a sort of database. The only real spreadsheet I have is a budgeting application I wrote for Psion Exchange's Abacus. I still use it with a QL emulation program — I can barely remember how the formulae work, so I'm certainly not going to try converting them!

Calc works just fine for my needs. But I don't do anything fancy either. For example, I use it to keep track of my vehicle(s) maintenance records. So simply formula usage (average oil change period, etc.) .

I tend to use Calc as a convenience, although sc/sc-im would work just as well for me though.... :D

You do realise, until today the last post on this thread was 2/6/2006 and Openoffice calc and particularly Libreoffice calc have come a long way since 2006. I've never used gnumeric.