Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature
FOSS spreadsheet hands-on comparison
Share
Print
CommentsCharts
Each of the three spreadsheets has a charting wizard that guides users through formatting a chart. Each allows extensive customization, although Gnumeric offers less than the other two and does not allow users to select a new chart format once they've chosen one. Both Gnumeric's and Calc's default colors are uninspired, and show jagged edges when enlarged. Neither is a match for KSpread charts, which have richer default colors and a more polished 3D look. Nor do they degrade when enlarged.Verdict: KSpread tops this category. The other two spreadsheets require more tweaking of charts to get an acceptable look, and much of the time the results still don't look as good as KSpread's. Calc takes second place for its greater variety of options than Gnumeric.
Computation speed
To test the speed of the three spreadsheets, I created three columns of 2,000 rows. In the first row of the first column, I entered 0. In the second row, I entered the function SUM(A1_ 1.10). The second column contained the cosine of the numbers in the first row, and the third column the sine. I then changed the number in the first row of the first column and waited to see how long each program took to update. All the spreadsheets responded too quickly to time with any accuracy, so I increased the number of rows to 5,000. All times were well below 2 seconds.
Verdict: Based on a subjective impression, it looked as though Gnumeric lived up to its reputation of being the fastest free spreadsheet. However, neither of the others was far behind. The OpenOffice.org 2.0 version of Calc handled the file noticeably faster than the 1.1.14 version did, and seemed slightly faster than KSpread. However, KSpread's performance was acceptable, even when opened in GNOME.
Perhaps a computer low in RAM or an even larger test document would slow the spreadsheets down enough to measure comparative speeds. However, this test does suggest that, for most users, speed shouldn't be a major factor in deciding which free spreadsheet to use. If you need more speed than any of these programs offers, you probably should be using a database instead.
Other features
Both Calc and KSpread have an advantage over Gnumeric because they are part of a larger office application, with access to a greater variety of tools; in theory, of course, Gnumeric is part of GNOME Office, but most of that suite's applications are not written, and those that are seem less integrated with each other than their counterparts in OpenOffice.org or KOffice. Both Calc and KSpread benefit, for example, by access to drawing tools and special character palettes. By contrast, Gnumeric offers drawing tools for only a few basic shapes.
In addition, Calc includes a variety of other useful features, such as the ability to insert movies or sounds, conditional formatting, and a variety of macro languages.
Because Excel dominates spreadsheets, all three free spreadsheets are designed to some extent with Excel compatibility in mind. Average users will find the import and export filters acceptable, especially for list-making. However, advanced users will find the success of the filters depends on the functions and tools for formulas used. None, of course, can run Visual Basic macros from Excel.
Calc's popularity is indicated by the fact that KSpread includes a filter for its version 2.0 OASIS format, while Gnumeric has one under development. All three programs can also export to PDF format.
Conclusion
After tallying the results from the individual evaluation categories, Calc comes out ahead, as it was tops in more than half the categories. It remains the most fully-featured FOSS spreadsheet, and some rumored problem with speed seem solved in version 2.0. However, this is a victory based on points rather than a knockout. Gnumeric ties Calc in one category and wins two rounds outright. Nor is Gnumeric as far ahead of KSpread as rumor makes it. Both Gnumeric and KSpread are developing rapidly, already outperforming Calc in some areas and making respectable showings in others.
Of course, these verdicts do not necessarily tell the whole story. Gnumeric's formula tools, for example, may make it more appealing to mathematical students than the other two. KSpread's excellent charting might make it the choice of those who often need to represent their data visually. For others, a particular feature -- perhaps even one not mentioned -- may be an important factor in choosing a spreadsheet.
Two decades ago, spreadsheets and word processors spearheaded the rise of the personal computer. Now, as FOSS unfolds, Calc, Gnumeric, and KSpread all seem ready to become as important as their proprietary predecessors.
Bruce Byfield is a freelance course designer and instructor and a technical journalist. He is also a regular contributor to NewsForge, ITMJ, and Linux.com.
Comments
on FOSS spreadsheet hands-on comparisonNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
For the large business, user education and a responsive IT shop can help here. From a large enterprise perspective, spreadsheets and single-user databases (MS-Access) can be bad. They result in inconsistent snapshots of data being held in silos around the business. (Bob's customer file in sales doesn't match Gene's customer file in accounting, etc.) In addition, end users like Bob and Gene may be doing their own Access programming and macro- creation. Finally, these all important spreadsheets could be stored locally and unbacked up on the user's machine.
If a fancy spreadsheet is being used for regular, routine, processing tasks that are essential for a business, a business should probably consider replacing it with a database and program that does the processing and is stored and regularly backed up on a network.
On a different note altogether, I for one find all that bulky deadweight of OOo to be a gargantuan anchor, dragging Calc down -- in contrast to Gnumeric's "lack of other office apps" cited as a drawback in the article.
Not having to install a gigabyte-sized suite of unrelated and unwanted applications is a huge plus.
This is the audience for whom movies and sounds are useful.
The other important point is that Gnumeric has 100% Excel function compatibility (albeit with higher numeric accuracy). I think the other sheets are in the high 90's.
The conclusion to the article didn't seem congruous with the rest of the article. It did not appear to me that Calc came out on top in "more than half the categories". It appeared that Calc and Gnumeric were comparable in the areas the author looked at. So -- do you need the whole suite, or do you just need a spreadsheet? Realistically, how many people actually embed a live spreadsheet table (and not just copy-pasted static data) in their wordprocessor, or a wordprocessor-managed text field in their spreadsheet? Nobody does that anymore, OLE is too clunky. Gnumeric is clean lightweight, and is one of the truly stellar examples of Free software.
A realistic project might have dozens of spreadsheets each containing thousands of rows of a couple dozen columns each. Judging computation speed by "eyeballing" relative performance on a very simple test is a reasonable place to start, but it is not a serious comparison.
Not that this review isn't worthwhile. It is, but it's like comparing a trio of new cars based on dashboard layouts and cabin features.
Thanks!
Unfortunately, most folks use spreadsheets *as* databases, or worse, as a word processor.
The biggest problem at first glance with the open source products is there are no references for functions.
OOo Calc also has good function references (currently under review in the OOo Authors project - www.oooauthors.org).
And the little gaps (macro recorder etc.) are filled in by knowledgeable readers, so it's win-win for everyone.
Thanks for another good one.
I use excel at work and try to use Calc at home, but when i have to get something done, i have to use excel.
The OSS tools havent matured to the extent to support:
- extensive ODBC/web data retrieval
- high row counts
- intuitive user interface (think Mac OS)
No user bothers to try a new product if it takes ages to load and has all the menus located differently, i doubt M$ has copyrighted the term Pivot Table, but if some new learning is required to do the same task, not many routine users prefer that.
At times i have to parse/report from logs and no OSS tool would support text based odbc connects to read a 200 meg plus ascii text and still allow you to build a pivot table with that
Excel sucks once a while, but those limitations are pretty well documented and dont show up as silly error codes most of the time
OSS tools have a long way to go before they can replace M$ office in enterprises and till that happens, they will always be taken with a pinch of salt.
bottomline: features/functionality/disk footprint/load time dont matter as much as an intuitive user experience (think Nokia/Blackberry menus)
OOo version 2 should provide you with a very pleasant surprise. It has good ODBC functionality(provided you include a java runtime environment), and capacity for twice as many rows of data as Excel instead of the half as many rows that you are used to.
The user interface is much closer to Excel than the current version. I don't know if that means easier to learn, or just less hard to change if you already use Excel.
Performance is another area where the OOo team has worked diligently. In my opinion, there is still room for improvement, but the performance compared against OOo 1.x is very significant, with the start up times being a good example. With 1.x you could get reasonable startup times by pro-loading a runtime environment. With Version 2, you can still load a runtime environment to improve startup times, but the startup times with V2 and no runtime loaded seem to be about half as long as the startup times for V1.x when they had a runtime environment pre-loaded.
There is still an issue with comprehensible/consistent error messages, but there has been a great improvement over what was.
(There might be more contributors from OOo, but then OOo has much more people working on it.)
They run the usual course of, "I love Linux, but... there is this little function (x) that I use and Open Source products don't have it."
More than likely it's something Open Source products do better anyway (like ODBC support: Try hooking up Oracle 11i to Excel. Good Luck. It runs fine with OO2)
Just an observation.
Nick
Gnumeric is the unique spreadsheet which is capable of drawing error bars and its charts functionality is better and more complete, from my point of view, than any of the others programs.
Try this simple test: create an empty spreadsheet, copy =rand() to its first 1000 rows and draw a line chart over the range.
Calc 2.0 beta freezes for nearly 30 seconds calculating this on my 1.6GHz Centrino laptop. The same happens when I try to resize the just-created chart object or manipulate it in nearly any way.
In contrast, Gnumeric's response is immediate, with any calculation it might be making so fast that I can not measure it in wall-clock terms.
Macro Recorder?
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 13, 2005 01:15 AMWith regard to spreadsheet use in large offices, there are often a few key speadsheet-users whose opinion is important. Any spreadsheet that doesn't satisfy those users has little chance of grabbing a foothold, let alone becoming a standard. Those users typically make extensive use of macro recording.
This is a nice article from the standpoint of home use.
#