Editing Lotus 1-2-3 (section)

== History ==

=== VisiCalc ===
[[VisiCalc]] was launched in 1979 on the [[Apple II]] and immediately became a bestseller. In contrast to earlier programs, VisiCalc allowed for the easy construction of free-form calculation systems for practically any purpose, limited primarily by the memory and speed of the computer. The application was so compelling that many purchased Apple II computers just to run the program.<ref>{{cite journal |author-last1=McMullen |author-first1=Barbara E. |author-last2=McMullen |author-first2=John F. |title=Apple Charts the Course for IBM |journal=[[PC Magazine]] |date=1984-02-21 |volume=3 |issue=3 |pages=122–129 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UCIvSU6Y2GAC&pg=PA120 |access-date=2015-01-11}}</ref> VisiCalc's runaway success on the Apple led to direct [[bug compatible|bug-compatible]] ports to other platforms, including [[Atari 8-bit computers]] and the [[Commodore PET]]. This included the [[IBM Personal Computer|IBM PC]] when it launched in 1981, and on this platform it quickly became another bestseller, with an estimated 300,000 sales in the first six months on the market.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Freiberger |first1=Paul |last2=Swaine |first2=Michael |title=Fire in the Valley: The Making of the Personal Computer |date=2000 |publisher=McGraw-Hill |isbn=978-0-07-135892-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=guwnAQAAIAAJ |language=en}}</ref>

There were well-known problems with VisiCalc, and several competitors appeared to address some of these issues. One early example was 1980's [[SuperCalc]], which solved the problem of [[circular reference]]s, while a slightly later example was [[Microsoft]] [[Multiplan]] from 1981, which offered larger sheets and other improvements. However, VisiCalc continued to outsell these and all other competitors.{{citation needed|date=August 2015}}

=== Beginnings ===
{{more citations needed|section|date=January 2021}}<!--4 paragraphs without citations-->
[[Image:Lotus 1-2-3 for DOS - Release 2.3 - User's Guide.jpg|thumb|left|upright|Lotus 1-2-3 Release 2.3 for DOS User's Guide; the Functions and Macros Guide is next to it.]]
The Lotus Development Corporation was founded by [[Mitch Kapor|Mitchell Kapor]], a friend of the developers of [[VisiCalc]] who had written software for it.{{r|vangelder198309}} 1-2-3 was originally written by [[Jonathan Sachs]], who had written two spreadsheet programs while working at [[Concentric Data Systems]], Inc.{{r|vangelder198309}}<ref>{{Citation |url=http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/lotus/library/ls-NDHistory/ |contribution=The History of Notes and Domino |date=2007-11-14 |access-date=2005-12-20 |publisher=[[IBM]] |title=Developer Works |archive-date=20 January 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210120160049/https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/lotus/library/ls-NDHistory/ |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{Citation |url=http://purl.umn.edu/107619 |title=Oral history interview with Jonathan Sachs |author-first=Martin |author-last=Campbell-Kelly |date=2004-05-07 |publisher=[[Charles Babbage Institute]], University of Minnesota}}.</ref>

"1-2-3" symbolizes the software's three modules: spreadsheet, business graphics and database (replacing the originally planned word processor). While Kapor had some programming experience, he felt that his design skills were superior,<ref name="vangelder198309">{{cite news | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mt9tF7XMFX4C&pg=PA156 | title=On The Road To Software Stardom | work=PC Magazine | date=August 1983 | accessdate=22 October 2013 | author=van Gelder, Lindsy | pages=156}}</ref> and he was primarily a marketing guru. His ability to develop his product to appeal to non-technical users was one secret to its rapid success. Unlike many technologists, Kapor relied on [[Focus group|focus-group]] feedback to make his user instructions more user-friendly. For example, in response to the instructions that read "Remove the protective cover and insert disc into computer", several focus-group participants tried to tear the stiff plastic envelope from the disc carrier. Kapor's recognition that highly technical instructions needed to be translated to everyday English was a strong reason for the product's popularity.

Lotus spent $1 million for advertising in January and February 1983 in ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'', ''[[Business Week]]'', ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'', ''[[Newsweek]]'' and computer magazines.{{r|vangelder198309}} Lotus 1-2-3 was released on 26 January 1983 and immediately overtook VisiCalc in sales. Unlike Microsoft Multiplan, it stayed very close to the model of VisiCalc, including the "A1" letter and number cell notation and slash-menu structure. It was cleanly programmed, relatively bug-free, performant (as it was programmed in [[x86]] [[assembly language]]) and wrote directly to video memory rather than using the slow DOS or BIOS text-output functions.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.techopedia.com/definition/4420/lotus-1-2-3|title=Lotus 1-2-3|last=Techopedia|date=15 December 2015 |access-date=2019-07-12}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://pcmuseum.ca/details.asp?id=36346&type=Software|title=Lotus 1-2-3 Release 2.4|last=Perconal Computer Museum|access-date=2019-07-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180613010619/http://pcmuseum.ca/details.asp?id=36346&type=software|archive-date=13 June 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref>

Among other novelties that Lotus introduced was a graph maker that could display several forms of graphs (including pie charts, bar graphics and line charts) but required a graphics card. At this early stage, the only video boards available for the PC were IBM's [[Color Graphics Adapter]] and [[IBM Monochrome Display Adapter|Monochrome Display and Printer Adapter]], the latter not supporting any graphics. However, because the two video boards used different RAM and port addresses, both could be installed in the same machine, so Lotus took advantage of this by supporting a "split" screen mode whereby the user could display the worksheet portion of 1-2-3 on the sharper monochrome video and the graphics on the [[Color Graphics Adapter|CGA display]].

The initial release of 1-2-3 supported only three video setups: CGA, [[IBM Monochrome Display Adapter|MDA]] (for which the graph maker was unavailable) or dual-monitor mode. However, a few months later, support was added for Hercules Computer Technology's [[Hercules Graphics Card|Hercules Graphics Adapter]], which was a clone of the MDA that allowed bitmap mode. The ability to have high-resolution text and graphics capabilities (at the expense of color) proved extremely popular and Lotus 1-2-3 is credited with popularizing the Hercules graphics card.

Subsequent releases of Lotus 1-2-3 supported more video standards, including EGA, AT&T/Olivetti and VGA. Significantly, support for the PCjr/Tandy modes was never added, and users of those machines were limited to CGA graphics.

The early versions of 1-2-3 also included a disk copy protection. While 1-2-3 was hard-disk installable, it required insertion of the original floppy disk when starting the application. This protection scheme was easily cracked and posed a minor inconvenience for home users, but it proved to be a serious nuisance in an office setting. Lotus discontinued the copy protection with the 3.0 release. However, it was necessary to initialize the system disk with the user's name and company name in order to customize the copy of the program. Release 2.2 and higher had this requirement. This was an irreversible process unless an exact copy of the original disk had been made, posing challenges for the transfer of program ownership.

The reliance on the specific hardware of the IBM PC led to 1-2-3 being utilized as one of the two [[stress testing (software)|stress-test]] applications, along with [[Microsoft Flight Simulator]], for true 100% compatibility when [[IBM PC compatible|PC clones]] appeared in the early 1980s.<ref name="springer19850603">{{cite magazine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8C4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA72 |title=Tandy's Magnificent Concession |magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |date=1985-06-03 |access-date=2014-07-19 |author-last=Springer |author-first=P. Gregory |pages=72 |volume=7 |issue=22}}</ref><ref name="lockwood198509">{{cite news |url=http://www.atarimagazines.com/creative/v11n9/50_Zenith_Z151_choice_of_U.php |title=Zenith Z-151; choice of U.S. Air Force and Navy |work=[[Creative Computing]] |date=September 1985 |access-date=2013-02-26 |author-last=Lockwood |author-first=Russ |pages=50}}</ref><ref name= "alsop19940131">{{cite magazine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=AzsEAAAAMBAJ&q=%22flight%20simulator%22&pg=PT1 |title=A public Windows pane to make compatibility clearer |access-date=2011-02-28 |author-last=Alsop |author-first=Stewart |date=1994-01-31 |magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |page=102 | volume=16 | issue=5 }}</ref><ref name= "dvorak19860512">{{cite magazine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Sy8EAAAAMBAJ&q=%22flight%20simulator%22&pg=PA66 |title=Springtime in Atlanta Beats Fall in Las Vegas |access-date=2011-02-28 |author-last=Dvorak |author-first=John C. |date=1986-05-12 |magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |page=66 |volume=8 |issue=19}}</ref><ref name="satchel19860127">{{cite magazine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=my8EAAAAMBAJ&q=%22flight%20simulator%22&pg=PA50 |title=The Corona ATP Is Faster Than The IBM PC AT, But It Has Flaws |access-date=2011-02-28 |author-last=Satchell |author-first=Stephen |date=1986-01-27 |magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |pages=47, 50 | volume=8 | issue=4}}</ref><ref name="mace19860505">{{cite magazine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Qi8EAAAAMBAJ&q=%22flight%20simulator%22&pg=PA5 |title=Amiga, Atari Ready PC Emulators |access-date=2011-02-28 |author-last1=Mace |author-first1=Scott |author-first2=Karen |author-last2=Sorensen |date=1986-05-05 |magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |page=5 |volume=8 |issue=18}}</ref><ref name="satchell19850114">{{cite magazine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-i4EAAAAMBAJ&q=%22flight%20simulator%22&pg=PA54 |title=AT&T 6300 Personal Computer |access-date=2011-02-28 |author-last=Satchell |author-first=Stephen |date=1985-01-14 |magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |pages=49, 53–54 |volume=7 |issue=1 & 2 }}</ref> 1-2-3 required two disk drives and at least 192K of memory, which made it incompatible with the [[IBM PCjr]]; Lotus produced a version for the PCjr that was on two cartridges but otherwise identical.<ref name="trivette198504">{{cite news |url=http://www.atarimagazines.com/compute/issue59/review_lotus_123.php |title=Lotus 1-2-3 For IBM PCjr |work=[[Compute!]] |date=April 1985 |access-date=2013-10-06 |author-last=Trivette |author-first=Donald B. |pages=63}}</ref>

By early 1984, the software was a [[killer application|killer app]] for the IBM PC and compatibles, while hurting sales of computers that could not run it. "They're looking for 1-2-3. Boy, are they looking for 1-2-3!" ''InfoWorld'' wrote. Noting that computer purchasers did not want PC compatibility as much as compatibility with certain PC software, the magazine suggested "let's tell it like it is. Let's not say 'PC compatible,' or even 'MS-DOS compatible.' Instead, let's say '1-2-3 compatible.{{'"}}<ref name="clapp19840227">{{cite magazine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gy4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA22 |title=PC compatibility |magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |date=1984-02-27 |access-date=2015-01-18 |author-last=Clapp |author-first=Doug |pages=22 |volume=6 |issue=9}}</ref> PC clones' advertising did often prominently state that they were compatible with 1-2-3.{{r|trivette198504}} An Apple II software company promised that its spreadsheet had "the power of 1-2-3".<ref name="incider198612">{{cite magazine |url=https://archive.org/stream/inCider_86-12#page/n176/mode/1up |title=VIP Professional |magazine=inCider |date=December 1986 |access-date=2015-02-04 |type=advertisement |pages=171 |issn=0740-0101|volume=4 |issue=12}}</ref> 1-2-3's macro system was the world's most popular [[application development language|application-development language]].{{r|stinson19910416}} Because spreadsheets use large amounts of memory, 1‐2‐3 helped popularize greater RAM capacities in PCs, and especially the advent of [[expanded memory]], which allowed greater than 640k to be accessed.

=== Rivals ===
Lotus 1-2-3 inspired imitators, the first of which was Mosaic Software's "The Twin", written in the fall of 1985 largely in the [[C (programming language)|C programming language]],<ref>{{Cite magazine|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=a91QXlvTPHAC&q=Mosaic+Software+%22The+Twin%22&pg=PA59|title=The Twin: Slow Lotus for Less.|last=Barr|first=Christopher|date=August 1986|magazine=PC Magazine | volume=5 |issue=14 |pages=59–60 |access-date=2019-07-12}}</ref> followed by VP-Planner, which was backed by [[Adam Osborne]].<ref>{{Cite magazine|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_S4EAAAAMBAJ&q=VP-Planner+Adam+Osborne&pg=PA42|title=Osborne's 1-2-3 Clone: VP Planner|last=O'Connor|first=Rory J.|date=19 August 1985|magazine=[[InfoWorld]] |volume=7|issue=33|page=42}}</ref> These were able to not only read 1-2-3 files, but also execute many or most macro programs by incorporating the same command structure. Copyright law had first been understood to only cover the source code of a program. After the success of lawsuits which claimed that the very "[[look and feel]]" of a program were covered, Lotus sought to ban any program which had a compatible command and menu structure. Program commands had not been considered to be covered before, but the commands of 1-2-3 were embedded in the words of the menu displayed on the screen. 1-2-3 won its three-year long court battle against Paperback Software International and Mosaic Software Inc. in 1990.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/29/business/lotus-wins-copyright-decision.html|title=Lotus Wins Copyright Decision|last=Markoff|first=John|newspaper=The New York Times|date=1990-06-29|access-date=2019-07-12 | url-access=limited}}</ref> However, when it sued [[Borland]] over its [[Quattro Pro]] spreadsheet in ''[[Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc.|Lotus v. Borland]]'', a six-year battle that ended at the Supreme Court in 1996, the final ruling appeared to support narrowing the applicability of copyright law to software; this is because the lower court's decision that it was not a copyright violation to merely have a compatible command menu or language was upheld, but only via stalemate.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=c6IS3RnN6qAC&q=lotus+borland&pg=PA63|chapter=Keyboard Commands and Menu Arrangements|last=Graham|first=Lawrence D.|title=Legal Battles that Shaped the Computer Industry |location=Westport, Connecticut |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |pages=63–68 |access-date=2019-07-12|isbn=9781567201789|lccn=99-13620|year=1999}}</ref> In 1995, the First Circuit found that command menus are an uncopyrightable "method of operation" under section 102(b) of the [[Copyright Act of 1976|Copyright Act]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gesmer|first=Lee T.|date=1 April 1995|title=Perspective: Lotus Development Corp. v. Borland International|url=https://www.gesmer.com/news/perspective-lotus-development-corp-v-borland-international|journal=Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly|access-date=12 July 2019|archive-date=6 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201106191059/https://www.gesmer.com/news/perspective-lotus-development-corp-v-borland-international|url-status=dead}}</ref> The 1-2-3 menu structure (example, slash File Erase) was itself an advanced version of single letter menus introduced in [[VisiCalc]]. When the case came before the Supreme Court, the justices would end up deadlocked 4–4. This meant that Borland had emerged victorious, but the extent to which copyright law would be applicable to computer software went unaddressed and undefined.<ref>{{Cite magazine|url=https://www.wired.com/1996/06/updata-29/|title=Lotus v. Borland: Deadlock on the Electronic Frontier|last=Spence|first=Kristin|magazine=Wired|date=1996-06-01|access-date=2019-07-12}}</ref><ref name=":0" />

=== Decline ===
[[Image:1-2-3 Floppy Disk Set.jpg|thumb|right|upright|A Lotus 1-2-3 box, as seen in an exhibit at the Computer History Museum in 2008]]

A 1990 member survey by the [[American Institute of Certified Public Accountants]] found that 62% of spreadsheet users used 1-2-3, with 93% recommending it to others. 1-2-3 was also the most popular database at 25% of respondents, ahead of [[Ashton-Tate]]'s [[dBase]] at 16%, as well as the most popular graphics and staff scheduling tools.<ref name="aicpa1990">{{Cite report |url=https://egrove.olemiss.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1563&context=aicpa_guides |title=1990 AICPA survey of computer usage |author-link=American Institute of Certified Public Accountants |year=1990 |id=561 |access-date=2025-04-30}}</ref> By 1991 Lotus 1-2-3 version 2.2 still dominated the spreadsheet market, with sales more than twice that of rivals. Microsoft and Borland's products lacked Lotus's ecosystem of hundreds of third-party add-ins, consultants, trainers, and books. Even Lotus could not persuade most customers or add-on developers to move to 1-2-3 version 3, or 1-2-3/G, because of their need for more hardware, mutual incompatibility, and lack of compelling new features.<ref name="stinson19910416">{{Cite magazine |last=Stinson |first=Craig |date=1991-04-16 |title=Building the Perfect Spreadsheet |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_OEk1QOJYw0C&pg=PT112 |access-date=2025-03-14 |magazine=PC |pages=101–164}}</ref>

Microsoft's early spreadsheet application Multiplan eventually gave way to [[Microsoft Excel|Excel]], which debuted on the Macintosh in 1985. It arrived on PCs with the release of Windows 2.x in 1987, but as Windows was not yet popular, it posed no serious threat to Lotus's stranglehold on spreadsheet sales. However, Lotus suffered technical setbacks in this period. Version 3 of Lotus 1-2-3, fully converted from its original macro assembler to the more portable [[C (programming language)|C language]], was delayed by more than a year as the totally new 1-2-3 had to be made portable across platforms and fully compatible with existing macro sets and file formats. The inability to fit the larger code size of compiled C into lower-powered machines forced the company to split its spreadsheet offerings, with 1-2-3 release 3 only for higher-end machines, and a new version 2.2, based on the 2.01 assembler code base, available for PCs without extended memory. By the time these versions were released in 1989, Microsoft had eroded much of Lotus's market share.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2015-08-14 |title=Antitrust Division {{!}} U.S. V. Microsoft: Court's Findings Of Fact |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-courts-findings-fact |access-date=2023-07-14 |website=www.justice.gov |language=en}}</ref> During the early 1990s, Windows grew in popularity, and along with it, Excel, which gradually displaced Lotus from its leading position. A planned total revamp of 1-2-3 for Windows fell apart, and all that the company could manage was a Windows adaptation of their existing spreadsheet with no changes except using a graphical interface. Additionally, several versions of 1-2-3 had different features and slightly different interfaces.

Lotus 1-2-3's intended successor, [[Lotus Symphony (MS-DOS)|Lotus Symphony]], was Lotus's entry into the anticipated "[[integrated software]]" market. It intended to expand the rudimentary all-in-one 1-2-3 into a fully-fledged spreadsheet, graph, database and word processor for DOS, but none of the integrated packages ever really succeeded. Lotus 1-2-3 migrated to the Windows platform, as part of [[IBM Lotus SmartSuite|Lotus SmartSuite]].

IBM's continued development and marketing of Lotus SmartSuite and [[OS/2]] during the 1990s placed it in direct competition with [[Microsoft Office]] and [[Microsoft Windows]], respectively. As a result, Microsoft "punished the IBM PC Company with higher prices, a late license for [[Windows 95]], and the withholding of technical and marketing support."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.cnet.com/Full+text+of+Judge+Jacksons+findings+of+fact+-+page+23/2009-1001_3-232571-23.html |title=Full text of Judge Jackson's findings of fact |publisher=[[CNet]] |date=January 2007 |at=Section 116 |access-date=3 July 2014 |archive-date=9 May 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200509201927/https://www.cnet.com/topics/tech-industry/ |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Full text of Judge Jackson's findings of fact |url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/full-text-of-judge-jacksons-findings-of-fact/ |access-date=2023-07-14 |website=CNET |language=en}}</ref> Microsoft did not grant IBM the [[Original equipment manufacturer|OEM]] rights for Windows 95 until 15 minutes prior to the release of Windows 95 on 24 August 1995. Because of this uncertainty, IBM machines were sold without Windows 95, while [[Compaq]], [[Hewlett-Packard|HP]], and other companies sold machines with Windows 95 from day one.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.cnet.com/Full+text+of+Judge+Jacksons+findings+of+fact+-+page+25/2009-1001_3-232571-25.html?tag=st.next |title=Full text of Judge Jackson's findings of fact |publisher=[[CNet]] |at=Section 125 |date=January 2007 |access-date=3 July 2014 |archive-date=8 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191208033143/http://news.cnet.com/Full+text+of+Judge+Jacksons+findings+of+fact+-+page+25/2009-1001_3-232571-25.html?tag=st.next |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2015-08-14 |title=Antitrust Division {{!}} U.S. V. Microsoft: Proposed Findings Of Fact |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-proposed-findings-fact |access-date=2023-07-14 |website=www.justice.gov |page=section 208 |language=en}}</ref>

On 11 June 2013, IBM announced it would withdraw the Lotus brand: IBM Lotus 1-2-3 Millennium Edition V9.x, IBM Lotus SmartSuite 9.x V9.8.0, and Organizer V6.1.0. IBM stated, "Customers will no longer be able to receive support for these offerings after 30 September 2014. No service extensions will be offered. There will be no replacement programs."<ref name=11june2013lotus123>{{cite news |url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/goodbye-lotus-1-2-3/ |title=Goodbye, Lotus 1-2-3 |publisher=ZDNet ZDNet |first=Steven J. |last=Vaughan-Nichols}}</ref>