peter@aucs.uucp (Peter Steele) (08/16/89)
I saw several comments on Excel v2.2 that it didn't run well in 1 mb
of memory. We currently have Excel v1.5 on our network, which consists
largely of Mac SEs and some Mac Pluses (a half dozen Mac IIs). Should
we upgrade Excel or stick with version 1.5. If 2.2 doesn't run well in
1 meg, maybe we should stick with 1.5...
--
Peter Steele, Microcomputer Applications Analyst
Acadia University, Wolfville, NS, Canada B0P1X0 (902)542-2201x121
UUCP: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!Peter
BITNET: Peter@Acadia Internet: Peter%Acadia.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDUhousen@ssc-vax.UUCP (Kevin Housen) (08/19/89)
<question about upgrading from Excel 1.5 to 2.2> We recently upgraded to Excel 2.2. After using it for a few weeks, these are my general impressions. On the plus side, the graphics seem to have been improved a little. In particular, you can now get thin lines on the LaserWriter. On the other hand, 2.2 seems to be much slower than 1.5, contrary to the claims of MicroSoft. For example, one of my worksheets which has maybe 100 rows by 30 cols (and is linked to another, much smaller) sheet takes more than a factor of 2 longer to recalculate in 2.2 compared to 1.5. I have a few other comparisons and have found no cases where 2.2 is actually faster than 1.5 (perhaps I havent tried the right ones). In some cases, 2.2 was a factor of 4 to 5 times slower. The slowdown seems to be minimized if you dont have worksheets that are linked together. If it were not for the nicer looking plots, I would stick with 1.5. But I would suggest that you find a version of 2.2 to play with before deciding one way or the other... Kevin Housen Standard disclaimers... . :wq