Excel spreadsheets have little to no validation logic that you're actually getting a good result, unless you have a secondary check (most spreadsheets are structured as "single entry" accounting, so lack the checks)

A prime example of this was the Reinhart/Rogoff paper advocating austerity that was widely quoted, and then it was discovered that the spreadsheet used had errors that invalidated the conclusions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_in_a_Time_of_Debt#Metho...

Just because technology is in use and "works" doesn't mean it's always correct.

That's a software engineer that is limited to an mostly untyped macro language, with worse version control and poor tooling. It's not that software can't be written as an Excel spreadsheet, it is that it is just inefficient and failure prune.

I guess that's technically true, because "most businesses" are sole proprietorships without any employees... but they could get by just fine with a checkbook and a note pad.

But the reasons the business software sector grew far beyond Excel of the 1990s is because of the inherent limitations in scaling solutions built by business analysts inside of Excel. There's a vague cutoff somewhere in the middle of the SMB market where software architecture starts to matter and the consequences for fuckup are higher than the cost of paying for professionally made software with, importantly, a vendor on the hook for making sure it doesn't fuck up.