Do you think the problem is that spreadsheet designers are too unimaginative? Or is it that there is little user demand for more complex and flexible spreadsheets? In other words, is the complexity and flexibility need being met elsewhere in a more efficient way?
Great question. My sense is that it's less about imagination (though there is some of that) and more about demand for conformity. Like, even when something isn't objectively more complex, if there is a learning curve involved, that will repell a lot of potential users who know how to use the old system. To get from here to there, there needs to be a series of applications that out-complete the old design without being very different, and that's hard. Put another way: cultural knowledge means designs evolve slowly.
For specific, complex, bespoke needs, developers build minimal products to meet that need (ie database stuff or stats code) and don't benefit from trying to unify their solution in with existing spreadsheet software.
Interesting, I would think that there would be at least some incentives to introduce upgrades to the spreadsheets like you suggested, such as access filtering to individual rows or cells.
I mean, I do think some of it is due to lack of imagination/ambition on the margin. If I wasn't dealing with AI risk I would happily work on making a spreadsheet competitor. My point is less that evolution to better designs can't happen, and more that it's slow because there isn't a ton of consumer demand for the incremental features, and the entrenched tech stacks make migrating to new software painful.
Do you think the problem is that spreadsheet designers are too unimaginative? Or is it that there is little user demand for more complex and flexible spreadsheets? In other words, is the complexity and flexibility need being met elsewhere in a more efficient way?
Great question. My sense is that it's less about imagination (though there is some of that) and more about demand for conformity. Like, even when something isn't objectively more complex, if there is a learning curve involved, that will repell a lot of potential users who know how to use the old system. To get from here to there, there needs to be a series of applications that out-complete the old design without being very different, and that's hard. Put another way: cultural knowledge means designs evolve slowly.
For specific, complex, bespoke needs, developers build minimal products to meet that need (ie database stuff or stats code) and don't benefit from trying to unify their solution in with existing spreadsheet software.
Interesting, I would think that there would be at least some incentives to introduce upgrades to the spreadsheets like you suggested, such as access filtering to individual rows or cells.
I mean, I do think some of it is due to lack of imagination/ambition on the margin. If I wasn't dealing with AI risk I would happily work on making a spreadsheet competitor. My point is less that evolution to better designs can't happen, and more that it's slow because there isn't a ton of consumer demand for the incremental features, and the entrenched tech stacks make migrating to new software painful.