concrete examples of what Numbers doesn't have?
The number of formulas that Numbers has vs. Excel. Pivot tables, VB support, I think those are pretty concrete. If you have to import an excel spreadsheet, you typically get a bunch of errors that xyz isn't supported in Numbers.
For basic or casual useage, numbers may be fine, though as I said, imo, entering data in Excel is much better then Numbers
Nope, was specifically replying to the "cumbersome data entry" point which I addressed in my initial reply to you. I find entering data, especially from 3rd party sources, much less painful in Numbers than Excel. So I asked for specific examples where you experienced data entry to be more cumbersome.
It is a bit strange to criticise Numbers (or any spreadsheet program) based on its ability to open files from, be compatible with, and export to different spreadsheet programs. Indeed it should be praised for being as compatible as it is...what I am trying to say is it should be judged on its own merits, not on how it interacts with other spreadsheet programs.
I'd also like to make clear that I am definitely not arguing that Numbers is superior to Excel overall, or should somehow take its place as the spreadsheet king. What I am asserting is that Numbers is much more capable than it is generally given credit for, especially if one takes the time and is willing to "re-learn" what they thought they knew through using a different spreadsheet program, such as Excel. Also through having used Numbers as my primary professional spreadsheet tool over the last several years, I have found that for the vast majority of users I have encountered, Numbers can just as easily produce the desired results as Excel. In the few cases I have run into where Numbers is lacking or insufficient, Excel doesn't seem to be the best tool either. A database solution would be vastly superior to both Excel and Numbers in a lot of these cases. However, and this is an obvious and big caveat - I realise that my experience is only my experience, and that it in no way do I consider it definitive. I am aware that the good old adage, YMMV, applies here in spades.
I just refer to my first post in this old thread. As
@sracer has pointed out again, it's a different approach. In order to become "good" with Numbers, you have to be willing to discard a lot of the basic ways you think about a spreadsheet that you learned as an Excel user.
It's a lot like learning another language. Since the solution and method for data manipulation (or in the case of language, idea expression) is not only different in a specific instance, but also in its fundamental approach, you can't expect to directly or literally translate every solution seamlessly between the two. You have to be willing to learn the fundamentals of the program (language) in order to fully understand its subtleties and become proficient.