Talk:Multiplan

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Apple Inc. Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Windows 1.0

There is a reference on the internet that early builds of Windows 1 (Codename Interface Manager) looked similar to this. MAybe a mention would be good? Thoughts? 75.28.168.254 (talk) 01:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apple II

Wasn't it also released for the Apple II? --67.83.176.25 04:23, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling?

In the advertisement Image:Msdosad.jpg, the spelling is "Multiplan", no capital letter at the beginning of "plan". - Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this abandonware? Drutt 14:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion?

The article concludes with the comment: "most spreadsheet users prefer Visicalc's A1 addressing style." I would suggest that most spreadsheet users have never seen Visicalc, and would be "familiar" with Excel's A1 addressing style because this is the default selection. Whenever addressing style is an issue for me, my own preference is for the R1C1 addressing style. 124.171.26.243 (talk) 10:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is the addressing style "not unlike" RPN? It should be made clear or removed? 83.227.178.89 (talk) 22:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think what is meant is that it's unconventional, like RPN, since most calculators use precedence and braces.

Also, I don't think "more efficient" is the appropriate phrase. It's just easier in the sense that a relative formula will always look the same regardless of which cell it is in, although it must be said that entering R1C1 references if very cumbersome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.213.97.66 (talk) 09:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that most spreadsheet users have never seen nor heard of Visicalc; however, I don't think that means the statement is incorrect. Maybe what should be done is to modify the statement to say, "most spreadsheet users prefer the A1 addressing style introduced by Visicalc.", to make it clear that the reference to Visicalc is a reference to the inventor/introducer. Christopher Rath (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

R1C1 vs A1

Some claims that Visicalc used R1C1, while Lotus introduced A1.^[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.161.96.4 (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Bricklin (the author of VisiCalc) specifies the use of A1 notation in VisiCalc. [1] So, there is no controversy. The web page you reference is clearly in error, and the author of the page even notes that he has received email telling him of this error and he has removed the assertion from his write-up. Christopher Rath (talk) 13:47, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Power, D. J., "A Brief History of Spreadsheets", DSSResources.COM, World Wide Web,http://dssresources.com/history/sshistory.html, version 3.6, 08/30/2004

MSX version: MSX-PLAN?

It looks like MSX-PLAN is the MSX version of Multiplan, see the screenshots here: http://www.generation-msx.nl/software/microsoft/msx-plan/719/ Pressing SHIFT reveals some other typical Multiplan options: Name, Opt., Print, Trans., Quit.

The start of the 32kB ROM image contains the text "MICROSOFT MP" (can either be MSX-PLAN or MultiPlan). It also has a date: 10/31/84. And the on-screen text is:

MSX-PLAN  Version 1.00
(C) Microsoft corp. 1985,86

Looks like it can handle:

TRUE FALSE COUNT ISNA ISERROR AVERAGE COLUMN STDEV ATAN SQRT LOG10 SIGN ROUND LOOKUP INDEX

So, the question is: is this really an MSX port of Multiplan? To me it looks like it. If so, it should of course be added to this article.

ManuelBilderbeek (talk) 20:05, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Epyx distribution for Commodore computers

This article needs to be updated to include Epyx as a distributor of the implementation for Commodore computers. --Lance E Sloan (talk) 15:02, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Epyx distribution of version 1.07 also included a Commodore 128 native executable in addition to the Commodore 64 executable allowing access to the added memory and the 80 column screen Kb3pxr (talk) 14:08, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

XENIX not Xenix!

Wikipedia has a serious problem with inaccuracy, as if DOS can be written as Dos willy-nilly. Someone in authority needs to fix this. XENIX and UNIX need to be in caps, along with many other UNIX derivatives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.193.137 (talk) 05:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that XENIX should be written in all upper case as that is the only way that it was historically typeset by Microsoft—that said, even in XENIX's hayday the press (e.g., BYTE Magazine) commonly typeset the name as Xenix. However, Unix is a different case: right from day-1 Unix has been typeset in both capitalised and all upper case forms. Moreover, even Peter Salus's authoritative book "A Quarter Century of UNIX" uses both spellings within its covers. Christopher Rath (talk) 11:23, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Power, D. J., "A Brief History of Spreadsheets", DSSResources.COM, World Wide Web,http://dssresources.com/history/sshistory.html, version 3.6, 08/30/2004

[1]