Re: MS Excel Working As Designed

On Jan 17, 2025 at 9:57:41 PM EST, "-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote:

On 1/17/25 6:37 PM, Tyrone wrote:

On Jan 17, 2025 at 6:08:53 PM EST, "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <ldo@nz.invalid>
wrote:
 

On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:46:39 +0000, Tyrone wrote:
 

Maybe if you read and learn FIRST, you would stop making a fool of
yourself.

 
Hard to believe it’s come to the point where the Microsoft marketing
machine has persuaded people that the ones pointing out the bug are the
“fools”, rather than the ones who were stupid enough to make it in the
first place.

 
It was designed that way to be compatible with Lotus 1,2,3.  Multiplan (and
later Excel) HAD to be 100% compatible with that.

 
Huh.  That's a TIL for me.

Yep. It was for Farley Fucktard too. You can tell by the way he is now
freaking out, posting pics from his personal gay porn collection in a childish
attempt to insult me for showing how clueless he is.  Again.   

This issue probably goes all the way back to the first spreadsheet, VisiCalc
in 1979 on the Apple II.  Lotus 1,2,3 was the IBM PC version of Visicalc in
1983.

 
Makes sense, even before contemplating if their original choice was
motivated because of how limited memory/storage/etc was in that era, or
just a lack of sophistication on leap year rules ... or both, since it
was decades prior to Y2K awareness.

VisiCalc required only 32K in the Apple II. 32K. Which meant that the DOS,
Visicalc and your spreadsheet had to fit in 32K.

Even in 1979, correctly handling dates in 1900 was not a priority. No one is
going to go over and above to handle all scenarios with 32K to work with.

BTW, since LO does not follow this standard (as weird as it is), this is
probably yet another reason why businesses don't use it.

 
Well, in modern context it isn't all that hard (once one is aware of the
limitation/requirement) to write some code that addresses 'special
rules' of how to address dates earlier than 1 March 1900, including the
compatibility layer for using files from other spreadsheet apps.

True. But since most businesses - then and now - are not concerned with doing
math on dates in 1900, there is no need to worry about that. And if a business
IS concerned with 1900 dates, they have already worked around this issue
decades ago in VisiCalc and/or Lotus 1-2-3.

That work around still works today in Excel. And as time goes by, this issue
becomes less and less relevant to anyone.  

Except probably to Farley Fucktard.  In 6 months he will post this big
"discovery" again. Because he is that stupid.  And childish.