Date axes in Excel 2003 and 2007

  • Thread starter Thread starter Morten Hvidberg-Knudsen
  • Start date Start date
M

Morten Hvidberg-Knudsen

In Excel 2003 it was possible to specify the range of a date axis simply by
entering the minmum and maximum as dates (e.g. "1 jan 2008").

In 2007 the "format axis"-> "axis options" dialog simply ignores minimum
and maximum values entered as date. You have to convert the date to a number
manually (i.e. 39448) before specifying minimum and maximum values.

Is there any other way to do it in 2007 ?

And why was the very handy 2003 behaviour removed in 2007 ?

Morten
 
You'll have noticed other shortcomings in Excel 2007's charting
functionality and user interface. I believe these issues stem from (a)
Office 2007 being hurried into production, (b) designers and coders of the
new charting mechanism not being completely familiar with the old mechanism,
thus not saving best practices from it.

I reported this long ago as a bug, and we'll see if it's corrected in Office
14.

- Jon
 
Yes I am new to 2007 and I am struggling with the new (and, admiited, nicer)
look and feel.

But apart from the look and feel, are the any improvements in 2007 (do you
have a link?) (i.e: is the struggle worth while ?)

From my point of view the has been no major improvements in Excel since
Excel95 (apart from the ability to handle more rows). Reflecting of course
that original object oriented Excel was incredibly well designed, but anyhow.

But the ActiveX / VBA technology is now being considered outdated by some
parts of Microsoft. Is Microsoft considering to redo Excel as .NET calsses
(instead of ActiveX objects?)

Regards

Morten
 
But apart from the look and feel, are the any improvements in 2007 (do you
have a link?) (i.e: is the struggle worth while ?)
Click to expand...

IMO the improvements are too few and far between to make up for the
labyrinthine user interface and related deterioration in productivity. And
BTW, I don't really think the look and feel is an improvement for most
experienced users. Excel 2003 is still my version of choice for my "real
work". I have clients spread over the spectrum from 2000 (small declining
numbers) through 2007 (small but rapidly increasing numbers). Most of my
work in 2007 involves upgrading custom menus and toolbars into custom Ribbon
interface elements, and fixing code that's broken in 2007. Most code that
breaks in 2007 seems more related to earlier versions being more tolerant of
poor programming practices than actual problems with 2007.
From my point of view the has been no major improvements in Excel since
Excel95 (apart from the ability to handle more rows). Reflecting of course
that original object oriented Excel was incredibly well designed, but
anyhow.
Click to expand...

There's something to be said for incremental improvement. Excel 97 was a big
improvement over 95 with its larger grid and enhanced VBA. 2000 made further
improvements including an upgrade to VBA and the introduction of pivot
charts. 2002 saw several enhancements to pivot tables and to some chart
options (data label options come to mind, but I think there were more). 2003
saw the introduction of a killer feature, the worksheet data List (which has
blossomed in 2007 into the Table). All of these versions saw improved
stability over prior versions.

Excel 2007 made some step changes, some of which being big improvements,
some big disappointments. I try to like it, I've been using it in various
beta and even pre-beta forms since 2005. But the fact is, my productivity
greatly affects my satisfaction with a software package, and any negative
changes in a new version will strongly reduce my satisfaction.
But the ActiveX / VBA technology is now being considered outdated by some
parts of Microsoft. Is Microsoft considering to redo Excel as .NET calsses
(instead of ActiveX objects?)
Click to expand...

They reassure us that VBA will remain a strong component of Excel for
several more versions (and look how long XLM has remained viable). I think
rather than try to rewrite Excel from the ground floor, Microsoft will
probably rely on better implementation of the PIAs and expansion of VSTO. I
have no special knowledge of their strategy, I am just responding based on
what little I know and on what sense I make out of what I see.

- Jon
 
Sorry to bother you with all my questions. Feel free to ignore.

Are there any changes in 2007 (positive or otherwise) with respects to
array functions (either native or those written in VBA)?
I like the feature a lot (for many reasons) but there was not a lot support
in using them in 2003 (e.g. no easy way of determining the size of the output
range they require, and no warning if the guess was too small)

Morten
 
Do you mean functions like LINEST and also UDFs? As far as I know, the user
still must make a guess. If I am not sure the output size, and I don't care
what it looks like, I'll select a range I know is more than adequate, and
the extra rows and columns are simply filled with #N/A.

- Jon
 
Back
Top