Don,
The "short" answer is simply "NO". But I expect you ALSO want to know HOW it is DIFFERENT ?
I invite others who have used Smartsuite 97 extensively to express any potential benefits of Smartsuite 97 over Lotus Release 5.0. However, don't be surprised to find that there are MANY Lotus Release 5.0 users who have purposely decided to REMAIN with Release 5.0 because of TWO PRIMARY REASONS.
1) The basic "look and feel" of the Smartsuite 97 version of Lotus 123 is simply NOT as simple and easy to use as Release 5.0. It appears that an attempt was made to "convert" the appearance of Lotus 123 into more of an "Excel look-a-like". Longtime Lotus 123 users can easily point to the MANY SIGNIFICANT reasons why Lotus 123 had ALWAYS been a FAR SUPERIOR product than Excel. And, Lotus Release 5.0 STILL IS a FAR SUPERIOR product than even the current-day version of Excel.
2) The second Primary Reason... In attempting to follow Microsoft, Lotus/IBM made a VERY FATEFULL and VERY DISASTROUS decision - to TERMINATE development of Lotus 123's (WONDERFUL, EASY-TO-USE, and POWERFUL) programming language, in favor of adopting Microsoft's "VISUAL BASIC" programming language. It is my understanding that this action was taken starting with Smartsuite 97, and that Lotus 123's "Lotus Script" is really a clone of "Visual Basic".
Don, I suggest the reason why MANY Lotus 123 Release 5.0 users are sticking with Release 5.0 - and thus their questions about compatibility problems with later versions of Windows - is largely because of the above 2 points.
But, in order for you and others to better understand the SIGNIFICANCE of these points, allow me to be more specific about Lotus 123 Release 5.0's TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGE over Microsoft's Excel.
Lotus 123's programming language was crafted in such a fashion that it was a "REAL BREAKTHROUGH" in terms of it being a POWERFUL, YET EASY-TO-USE programming language. Not only was this language EXTREMELY EASY to use, but it ALSO permitted easy-to-use "INTERACTIVITY" with the spreadsheet data and the built-in spreadsheet functions. In short, it was THE VERY BEST "programming tool" for "application development" - at least for small and medium-sized applications. And, for larger applications which would require huge database interactivity, Lotus 123 Release 5.0 was also VERY capable of being a "front-end" for such larger applications, wherein Lotus 123 could be used for data-gathering and report-generation for these large databases.
Interesting point - In spite of Lotus 123 Release 5.0's programming language being SO APPEALING because of its combined "Power" and "Ease-Of-Use", Lotus Corporation (now IBM) never gave it a NAME. To this day, it still officially remains "nameless". By default, the name that this very powerful language acquired, was simply "macros". To make matters worse, other software ALSO used the same "generic" term of "macros", and in these other cases, the term "macro" referred primarily to very "simple" procedures. This, in turn, caused many to "overlook" this EXTREMELY POWERFUL programming language.
A couple of years ago, I decided to do what Lotus Corporation FAILED to do - give this wonderful language a name. I decided to adopt the name "SNAP" - which stands for "Super Natural Application Programming". And, of course, using this language, it is certainly a real "snap" to develop applications, ESPECIALLY when compared to Microsoft Excel and their "VISUAL BASIC".
Visual BASIC, while perhaps powerful, is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to learn and use. It is SO difficult to work with, as compared to "SNAP", that Visual BASIC is effectively "NOT EVEN IN THE SAME LEAGUE" - and it makes Excel VERY INFERIOR.
Why am I so convinced of the difference between "SNAP" and Visual Basic ? Here's why…
For several years, I had been developing major applications using Lotus 123 and always wondered why no one had developed comparable applications using Excel. And this STILL applies to this day. For example I have developed a MAJOR Estimating program using Lotus 123 Release 5.0, and I have yet to see any sign of a comparable product on the Internet.
And, for the past couple of years, since my employer adopted Microsoft Office, I have: 1) worked with "Visual Basic graduates" and 2) developed applications using Visual Basic. From both these vantage points, I learned first hand that INDEED there is NO comparison - "SNAP" is EXCEEDINGLY EASIER to learn and use. And, indeed, "power" and "ease-of-use" are an AWESOME combination. I witnessed first hand, the Visual Basic graduates REALLY STRUGGLE to re-create applications I had ALREADY created in Lotus 123, and I had done so in CONSIDERABLY LESS time.
Longtime programmers who know and use the programming language "C" or "C++" will tell you that if you want PURE POWER, then "C" is THE BEST. Actually, I understand that the later versions of Lotus 123 were written in "C". Perhaps with such applications as developing "software" like Lotus 123, pure power IS important. However, with other "general application development", POWER is not ALL that is important - EASE-OF-USE is ALSO very important. Visual BASIC users look at "C", and say that Visual BASIC is FAR easier. I look at Visual BASIC as compared to Lotus 123's "SNAP", and say that "SNAP" is to Visual BASIC what Visual BASIC is to "C".
Lotus Corporation therefore simply "SHOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT" by adopting Microsoft's programming language of Visual Basic. As mentioned, Lotus Corporation included "Lotus Script" in Smartsuite 97, and apparently is very much a "clone" of Visual Basic.
Then, to make matters EVEN WORSE, Lotus Corporation (now IBM) made a COLOSSUL mistake in the mid-1990's of NOT purchasing the rights to a product called "VISUAL BALER" (not to be confused with Visual BASIC).
"Visual BALER" is a product which first surfaced as a DOS-based "spreadsheet compiler". And as a DOS-based compiler, it worked EXTREMELY well. It adopted Lotus 123's macro (SNAP) language and "enhanced" it with several important extra functions and PROTECTION features that had been and are STILL severely lacking in Lotus 123.
One of the major "selling features" advertised by Baler Corporation, was that their "enhanced" version of Lotus 123's "SNAP" programming language was SO easy to use, that NON-PROGRAMMERS would be very capable of developing applications. In other words, this software would appeal to the "general population" and not just to "career programmers".
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that the world is STILL searching for computer software with which they can develop applications for personal or office use WITHOUT having to "drop their day job" to become a CAREER PROGRAMMER.
After Windows surfaced in the early 1990's, Baler Corporation attempted to convert their DOS-based product over to a Windows-based product. They did create a product (latest version being "Visual BALER 2.5"

, but unfortunately it is full of too many bugs to be useful for most meaningful or "heavy-duty" applications. It is specifically because of these bugs that the product never gained acceptance and it forced Baler Corporation into bankruptcy.
The product was later purchased by "Patin and Associates" and is still available over the Internet, but I don't expect it is attracting too many takers.
About nine months to a year ago, a "financial backer" apparently contributed some dollars to hire a group of four programmers to investigate the possibility of "refitting" Visual Baler and converting it into a 32-bit application. I have not yet heard of any outcome.
My final point… The computer world needs a POWERFUL AND EASY-TO-USE "general purpose", "application development tool", and it ALSO needs a "spreadsheet compiler" to permit the creation of "stand-alone" applications. The most obvious solution to these needs, is a "merger" of the Lotus 123 spreadsheet together with the "SNAP-enhanced" language of Visual BALER.
At one point, Lotus Corporation, according to a former Baler Corporation programmer, was intimidated by the threat posed by Visual BALER. Lotus seemingly was concerned that potential Lotus 123 purchasers would be able to purchase "customized" spreadsheets developed in Visual BALER instead of purchasing Lotus 123. This was plain short-sightedness. What Lotus failed to appreciate, is that these customized applications would NOT replace the need for spreadsheet users to have Lotus 123 for development of their own "general purpose" applications.
Furthermore, Lotus Corporation failed to appreciate that tremendous "royalties" could have been earned from small and large application developers. These developers, myself included, would be more than willing to pay Lotus Corporation for each of the "customized" products developed and sold using this new "duo" combination of Lotus 123 and Visual BALER.
My hope is that IBM executives will "tune in" to this "ground level" conversation over what is REALLY happening at "ground zero". If they TRULY "tune in" to the points raised here, I am optimistic that our NEW MILLENNIUM will soon see the development of "spreadsheet based" application-development-software like a "Lotus 123 SNAP/Compiler Edition" which will be "hotly" embraced by the "general public" as well as career programmers. This indeed has the potential to enable Lotus/IBM to re-take the lead in the sale of spreadsheet / application development software.
Regards, …Dale Watson dwatson@home.com -or- dwatson@bsi.gov.mb.ca