123user wrote...
Excel's database formulas are primitive. They work like 1-2-3's
database functions did in its Release 3. Instead of making the
user create a separate criteria range, the database functions
should allow criteria to be written into the formula, as 1-2-3's
database functions do. After using 1-2-3 for 15 years, in which
time I became very proficient in the software, my agency has
joined the horde that use Excel. I rely heavily on database
functions and switching to Excel's presents big problems for me.
I realize that I can approximate a database function with
criteria with arrays. However, this requires creating a large
number of ranges while creating a database that you can use
database functions with requires namng only one range.
....

First, you're wrong about your 123 versions. Criteria in function
calls began in 123 Release 3.0. It's Release 2.x and earlier that
used creiteria ranges.

Next, if you think 123's @D... functions are good, SQL is even
better. While there are some problems with memory leaks in some
earlier versions, Excel's SQL.REQUEST add-on function is much more
powerful than 123's @D... functions. Granted Excel's current D...
function equivalents are mired in the mid-1980s, why settle for
just moving into the early 1990s?

And you don't even need to use SQL.REQUEST for simpler calcs. You
could use SUMPRODUCT for most conditional counting and summing,
and you could use single cell array formulas for most of the other
D... functions. Even including wild card text searching.

What are your 123 formulas? They should be simple enough to convert
into single cell Excel work-alikes.