Article View: comp.sys.next.software
Article #839Re: Mesa --- lack of database functionality
From: David Pollak
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:03
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:03
99 lines
5658 bytes
5658 bytes
In article <1992Aug19.143528.9405@mic.ucla.edu> iwelch@agsm.ucla.edu (Ivo Welch) writes: > > I have been trying to convince Athena Design to include a Unix command-line > file reader. That is, a utility that reads a Mesa spreadsheet and outputs an > ASCII data file (i.e. a command line equivalent of "save as text"). That would > allow me to use Mesa to keep all my databases, and to have S or other Unix > filters operate on a database; or to dial in and look at the contents of my > spreadsheets. (Even nicer if there was an update mechanism.) Note that this > cannot be accomplished through Mesa's API. > > Athena Design sees no demand for this feature, although it would require only > minimal effort to implement. Perhaps more requests could convince Athena > Design otherwise. I very much like their spreadsheet, and would want to use it > for real work. I'd like to reply publicly to this. First, from an engineering standpoint, this is not an easy task. It requires more than a "minimal effort." The part of the program that loads worksheets is intimately tied to the display mechanism. This means that we would have to maintain two separate versions of the code and make sure that the file loading part worked on both across all versions of the file format (numbering 9 at this point, and yes we are still fully compatible with all files written since version 0.5 of the program.) From a logistics standpoint, the concept of having yet another program that we have to test every time we do a rev seems to require a lot of justification. Currently, we ship the Mesa program and an example program that takes advantage of our object library. We have to test these two program every time we ship a new version (we have been shipping new versions at least once a month since May, our next version is due out on September 4th and include SQL capabilities and cell shading, not to mention dozens of little changes and fixes.) We take having a solid product version seriously. This is why folks like Preferred Health Care have stated that we had the most solid and reliable beta product they have ever used. The justification for having an additional program to test every time we ship has to be very strong. Let's look at the justification. One person wants to be able to dial into his NeXT and use his spreadsheet like a database. He is an educational user, so he will be buying Mesa for less than a hundred dollars. He wants us to add this functionality, despite that Mesa is a NeXTSTEP application, despite that no other spreadsheet on the NeXT offers this functionality, despite that he could export his files from Mesa while he was using the NeXT locally and then access them via modem later. We pride ourselves on listening to customer feedback. Customers said, "we want a ToolBar." Mesa has the coolest ToolBar of any program on any machine. Customers said, "we want direct manipulation." Mesa allows drag and drop color and fonts (yes, fonts) to change cell color, shading, graph element color, etc. Customers said, "we want to access our Sybase data and pump it into the worksheet." Mesa now provides full Sybase SQL capabilities with unlimited queries associated with each worksheet. Customers said, "we want a spreadsheet view in our custom application." No problem, and coming with 1.1 you can even edit cells in your custom app and have those edits reflected in the worksheet. Customers said, "we want live, editable spreadsheet views in our word processor." You'll have to wait 'til Seybold to see our answer to this. We would very much like to respond to every user's request for every new feature. We have limited resources. There are still a number of major features we want to add to Mesa (including a cool scripting language, 3D charts (both in response to Appsoft Solution, which we view as a very solid competitor), infinite level Undo/Redo, a NS486 version, better execution of Lotus macros, support for PostScript Level 2, support for the DBKit, Excel file capabilities, etc.) A command-line interface to Mesa is just not a high priority. Finally, I'd like to point out that Mesa has the best database capabilities of any spreadsheet. It fully supports Lotus-type database functions, even across linked sheets. It supports unlimited Sybase queries to pull in data from real databases. To sum up, we want to make Mesa an awesome spreadsheet. We have and will continue to listen to user input and let that guide our development of the product. We have to prioritize the requests for new functionality in terms of "how much will this add to the product" and "will the additional sales of the product justify this addition" (with much more weight given to the first question.) Ivo, thanks for your feedback. If you want to get command-line access to database information, why don't you buy a database (like Sybase)? David -- David Pollak - dpp@athena.com - NeXTMail Compliant Attorney at Law, Feeder of the Bears, Athena Design, Inc.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Aug20.150304.10018@dpp>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!dpp!dppReferences:
<1992Aug19.143528.9405@mic.ucla.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.software Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!dpp!dpp From: dpp@athena.com (David Pollak) Subject: Re: Mesa --- lack of database functionality Message-ID: <1992Aug20.150304.10018@dpp> Sender: dpp@dpp Reply-To: dpp@athena.com (David Pollak) Organization: Athena Design, Inc. References: <1992Aug19.143528.9405@mic.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:03:04 GMT Lines: 99