Talk:List of spreadsheet software
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page contains two sets of several sections (example on line spreadsheets) that are not identical. they require merging and the page re-structuring.
I do not agree about that merging. I like the actual format of this page. The division into two global category "Freeware/Open-source" versus "Proprietary" helps to make quick distinction between two different set of products addressing two different audience needs. ~Mfortier 21:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Open Source/OS?
I agree, it is nice to know if Open-source or not but I think the OS is even more important. Software websites first divide by platform. ycc2106 10:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Open Source is not Freeware
It can be freeware and proprietary closed-source! Read the page Free Software for the difference between Freeware and Free Software.
This article mixes distincts things like a spreadsheet for windows which was offered for a limited time freeware and no longer available at the author site like Budgie and true Free Software GPL software for Unix like gnumeric, oocalc, oleo.
It surely needs to be restructured, and compared with the good review of Christopher Brown (not uptodate with last software development), it would allow to include some historical spreadsheet yet in used like sc (which is still the base of some spreadsheet plugin in the MoinMoin wiki) and some popular unix spreadsheet like siag (in the familly of scheme based spreadsheet like also xxl, but the last is no longer developed)
Last a reference like the num 4 that links directly to an executable program must be changed, when reading the original page from wich this archive is extracted, I supposed it would better be erased! --marc 16:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] How to remove spam from this article
I dont understand why this article requires so many references. If we closely look at the references, the editgrid refers to its home page and not at one location but at multiple locations. When editgrid already has a wiki page and the text is already linked to that page, why do we need a reference which links to the external site. I believe this is a classic case of spam links to external articles. If there is no objection, i intend to remove almost all the references. Dhshah (talk) 15:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
