Talk:Numbers (spreadsheet)

Fair use rationale for Image:Numbers.png

Image:Numbers.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Numbers 08.png

Image:Numbers 08.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Numbers.png

Image:Numbers.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Notable omissions

I had removed this section from the article because there was no source and the feature was not explained. Doing some Google searching revealed nothing. You said it means its impossible to use large spreadsheets, but this isn't the case. If you're going to re-add it, please include a citation (preferably from a notable site and not a forum post, though) and clear explanation. Also, a note about analytic tools might be a good thing to have in such a section. Althepal (talk) 04:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I give up. If it matters that much to you to conceal this information, then go a head and hide it. If you examine the forums you'll see that there are thousands of posts about this. I'm also surprised you found nothing by searching. There are many of attempts by users to find or develop a "fix", all of them elaborate and mostly useless. You can create large spreadsheets in Numbers (of course) but can't use them, because there's no way to lock the column and row headers when you scroll, and a a result there's no way to know what column or row you're looking at once the row or column header has scrolled off the screen. — Aldaron • T/C 14:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I still don't see what you mean. I can work with large spreadsheets just fine. I don't notice any difference between that in Numbers and in Excel. Forum posts aren't really notable... can you please show me a source (even a specific forum conversation just so I understand what the issue is)? I don't want to conceal any information, its that what was in the article is unclear and not sourced. If its going to be there, it needs to be clear. Now, from your description: "there's no way to lock the column and row headers when you scroll, and a a result there's no way to know what column or row you're looking at once the row or column header has scrolled off the screen". Here: http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/435/picture1kx0.png . I took a screenshot, and I made it so the spreadsheet is beyond the window, and I scrolled to the bottom-right corner, and it shows which column/row I'm in. I'm not sure what you mean by "lock", so maybe I'm missing something? Please clarify? Althepal (talk) 19:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's the issue: those headers lock, but contain no user supplied information (like the names of the columns). In Excel (and believe me, I'm not defending Excel!) you can "lock" several uppermost rows, and/or several leftmost columns to serve as informative labels for the contents of the corresponding columns and rows. That's what Numbers lacks, and that's why it cannot be used for tables of any significant size. — Aldaron • T/C 22:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, if I understand what you mean, that might be something to include. However, I'm trying right now in Excel 2008 and am no more able to label cell numbers there than in Numbers (unless this is some kind of feature I've never noticed?). Maybe you can show me screenshots of the difference? So if you add it, just make sure that all this is clear in the section, and please provide some kind of citation. Also, like I said, I've heard things (but never tried it out) about a difference in analytic tools between Excel and Numbers, being a reason scientists only want to use Office. I don't know much about the topic, but maybe you can add a note about this if you re-add the section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Althepal (talk • contribs) 00:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, you could try not to abuse spreadsheet into behaving like a database. A spreadsheet is a big calculator, what matters is cell coordinates, not pseudo-field names. If you want field names, then you're using the wrong software. In this context, I feel that Numbers is doing the "right thing" by providing ever-present coordinates and only highlighted header/footer/left-band. And curiously, Excel behavior is exactly the opposite. Oh, and 90% of the world doing it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.244.102.52 (talk) 20:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

"Abuse a spreadsheet into behaving like a database" Oh, you're a couple decades late. You could never used a software like Javelin (and I imagine Lotus Improv worked similarly) - Javelin Software worked very much like a spreadsheet but names drove everything. Its designers were way ahead of their time and way ahead of most users and hardware makers. Modest spreadsheets crashed the fairly advanced PCs of the day that I used forcing me to revert back to using crappy spreadsheet software. Then IT departments started standardizing (aka restricting) users to MS Office. I blame IT bureaucracies for killing a lot of really progressive and passionate workplace innovation. They sucked the computing passion right out of millions of lay users who now have to suffer with Excel's limitations and beg understaffed IT departments for application development.AlbertaSunwapta (talk) 05:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd think another noteworthy omission is there is no "paste special": no quick way to cut and paste a table from a pdf or website into numbers and have it end up as anything other than a block of text. Gront (talk) 11:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Wrong: Edit->Paste and Match Style or Cmd+Opt+Shift+V (tough shortcut, but easily remappable)

Wrong. Its not the same thing. All "paste and match style" will do is to take your block of text and use the current text formatting style of the cell you paste it into. It's still just a big block of text, but perhaps with a different font. I still don't think its a noteworthy omission, though, even though I full wish it had this feature myself. -- Ch'marr (talk) 23:05, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps not what User:Gront is thinking of, but if you copy tab-delimited text and paste it into Numbers, it will put the information into the appropriate cells. Many applications that contain tables will copy them as tab-delimited text. Bytesmiths (talk) 03:00, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Moving Numbers (software)

If you Google "numbers spreadsheet" you will not find the article here on the Wiki. Is there any naming guide that says the article should be Numbers (software) and not Numbers (spreadsheet) or something similar? Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I can't find any firm answer, but the spirit of much of WP:NC is consistency. All the iWork articles should be named consistently...and it turns out they are not. I think it's best to call it Numbers (iWork), and likewise for Pages and Keynote. I'll initiate that process. In the mean time, I can make Numbers (spreadsheet) into a redirect which will help others find the article without it actually being moved there. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 01:11, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I've made the redirect and put up proposed move notices on all three pages. I expect Numbers and Keynote to be noncontroversial since they already have parenthetical names. Pages does not, and I can see arguments both for and against appending " (iWork)" to the title. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 01:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

The basic goal of any article should be that when the user types typical queries into Google (or whatever) they should be able to find the page. According to Google Insight, "numbers spreadsheet" is a far more common search than "numbers iWork", about 3 times. So I'm hesitant to use (iWork) for that reason. Maury Markowitz (talk) 01:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Having read the naming article, or re-read, but it was so long ago it's practically new, I think the "consistency" is saying you should look at other articles like this one. In this case, there's two interpretations, "like this one" could mean other spreadsheets, or it could mean other apps in the suite. In the first case, the clear pattern is "(spreadsheet)" with an optional "program" or "software" added on. If you look at other programs in the suite, the only similar thing I find is "Keynote (presentation software)". So I think the pattern is set. Perhaps Pages should also be renamed "Pages (word processor program)"? Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Part of my dislike of using the type of software parenthetically is that we can make spreadsheet concise, word processor somewhat concise, but presentation software has no word that omits the term "software". I would prefer not to use that term since it seems fairly generic and unhelpful. WP:NAMINGCRITERIA says names should be: Recognizable, Natural, Precise, Concise, and Consistent. While your point about Google results argues against the Naturalness of "(iWork)", I think it meets all the other criteria quite well. (It will be consistent if we rename the other articles.) Where do you see that "(spreadsheet)" is common? Not one page in Category:Spreadsheet software uses it, partially because no other company gives their software the same name as book of the Bible and the plural of a common word. Furthermore the iLife suite is no help, since none of them use parenthetical clarifiers. So there is no pattern set. That said I think Numbers (spreadsheet) is a fine redirect; that's why I made it. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 12:50, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Numbers is not a spreadsheet, it's a spreadsheet application. It should therefore not be Numbers (spreadsheet). violet/riga _^[talk] 18:06, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

iWork doesn't give much information to the new user and sounds more like we're branding ourselves as Apple. I oppose this descriptor. Spreadsheet seems fine to me. As far as violetriga's point that Numbers is not a spreadsheet but rather a "spreadsheet application", this seems like splitting hairs. 158.145.240.100 (talk) 19:09, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

It's not splitting hairs, it's a massive difference. violet/riga _^[talk] 21:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it should be (software) or at least (spreadsheet software). Just using (spreadsheet) would make more sense if it was one specific spreadsheet document, but it is not, and the title doesn't need to explain what the software does. (software) seems unambiguous and accurate to me. FeatherPurple (talk) 18:37, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm in strong opposition to this proposal. iWork is a brand, not a disambiguation term that actually explains to those who don't know what the subject is. If you search for "numbers software" the first hit you get is the link to this subject on Apple's website, BTW. Steven Walling • talk 20:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think any suggestion of using "iWork" in parenthesis is appropriate. In every case i've seen, the disambiguation text in parenthesis is a generic description. "boat" "writer" "baseball player" "politician" "software" rather than something else which does not really add any clarity. If anything "part of iWork software bundle" would be the most appropriate, but I'm not suggesting that at all. The only change I would make to the existing scheme is change "Pages" to "Pages (software)", because while "Pages" fairly broadly refers to the software product, the software is hardly the source of the word, and the source word does not have any reasonable fuller expansion to warrant a distinction. That last sentence is for the people that might try to suggest I am thus arguing that "Melbourne" should point to Lord Melbourne rather than the city. I'm not arguing that at all -- Ch'marr (talk) 23:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

So where are we here?

I personally prefer (spreadsheet). It appears that 'marr supports this. It appears that violet is sort-of agreeing with (spreadsheet), but with a caveat. HereToHelp likes (iWork). Are there any "votes" in support of (iWork)? Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Concerning the "Other notable features" section

This currently reads like a promotional advetisement to me. I propose deletion and reintegration of the section. The information can be integrated into the layout and display section, carefully. Besides, the list should be turned into prose. Sennecaster (What now?) 03:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)