Excel 12

  • Thread starter Thread starter Amedee Van Gasse
  • Start date Start date
A

Amedee Van Gasse

I'm curious about what to expect - or not to expect.
Anyone?

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in dezelfde thread in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.
 
Unless someone managed to fill a depressed MS employed Excel programmer with
tequila (... hmm, how hard could that be ? :-), this would be just
unqualified guessing. Absolutely nothing is stated anyhwere.
One can of couse hope for the continuing lack of animated gifs and blinking
cell formats.

Let's rather reverse the question: Which imaginary new features would make
you folks pay -real money- for an upgrade ?

Best wishes Harald

"Amedee Van Gasse"
 
Harald Staff <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 30 jun 2004 een
briljante bijdrage in <Klik op deze link
om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:
Unless someone managed to fill a depressed MS employed Excel
programmer with tequila (... hmm, how hard could that be ? :-), this
would be just unqualified guessing. Absolutely nothing is stated
anyhwere. One can of couse hope for the continuing lack of animated
gifs and blinking cell formats.

Let's rather reverse the question: Which imaginary new features would
make you folks pay -real money- for an upgrade ?

Best wishes Harald

Harald,

You have raised an interesting question. I hope other people will also
share their thoughts.

What I *really* would like to see:
- remove the 256 column and 65K row limit
- Fix the date system: no more switching between system 1900 and 1904
- A lot of other things related to dates/times: support for historical
data in the past, like I would like to know on what weekday Columbus
discovered the West Indies (which would be a pre-Gregorian date)
- Also support for negative times, without switching to system 1904
- A correct weeknum function that calculates ISO weeknumbers. I don't
know but I can imagine there are other functions that are not ISO.
- A file format under a LGPL-compatible license, not the patented xml
extension they use now in 2003.

Some of these things can be programmed around using vba, but they should
have been standard features.

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in dezelfde thread in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.
 
Hi Amedee!

Re: I would like to know on what weekday Columbus discovered the West
Indies (which would be a pre-Gregorian date)

Here's a formula solution to that one pending issue of Excel Turbo
(V28)

Day of Month A2
Month Number B2
Year Number C2
Data validated entry of Gregorian or Julian in D2

Formula:
=CHOOSE(IF(D2="Gregorian",MOD(A2+(C2-(INT((14-B2)/12)))+INT((C2-(INT((14-B2)/12)))/4)-INT((C2-(INT((14-B2)/12)))/100)+INT((C2-(INT((14-B2)/12)))/400)+INT((31*(B2+(12*(INT((14-B2)/12)))-2))/12),7),IF(D2="Julian",MOD(5+A2+C2-INT((14-B2)/12)+INT((C2-INT((14-B2)/12))/4)+INT((31*(B2+(12*INT((14-B2)/12))-2))/12),7),"Error"))+1,"Sunday","Monday","Tuesday","Wednesday","Thursday","Friday","Saturday")
 
Norman Harker <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 01 jul 2004
een briljante bijdrage in <Klik op deze
link om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:
Hi Amedee!

Re: I would like to know on what weekday Columbus discovered the West
Indies (which would be a pre-Gregorian date)

Here's a formula solution to that one pending issue of Excel Turbo
(V28)

Day of Month A2
Month Number B2
Year Number C2
Data validated entry of Gregorian or Julian in D2

Formula:
=CHOOSE(IF(D2="Gregorian",MOD(A2+(C2-(INT((14-B2)/12)))+INT((C2-(INT((1
4-B2)/12)))/4)-INT((C2-(INT((14-B2)/12)))/100)+INT((C2-(INT((14-B2)/12)
))/400)+INT((31*(B2+(12*(INT((14-B2)/12)))-2))/12),7),IF(D2="Julian",MO
D(5+A2+C2-INT((14-B2)/12)+INT((C2-INT((14-B2)/12))/4)+INT((31*(B2+(12*I
NT((14-B2)/12))-2))/12),7),"Error"))+1,"Sunday","Monday","Tuesday","Wed
nesday","Thursday","Friday","Saturday")

Yeah well this proves my point. It was only a fictitious example anyway.
A good answer should have been =WEEKDAY(A1), no matter what year it is.
Or perhaps =WEEKDAY(A1,"Julian") could be acceptable.

Anyway, thanks for your formula. I will use it if I ever need to work with
historical dates (not very likely however).

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in dezelfde thread in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.
 
Hi Amedee!

I agree! I only did it as a curiosity. A UDF using the the same
formulas would be a much better approach and give you what you want.

You have to give Julian / Gregorian options because the date for the
changeover varied from country to country (or in the case of the USA,
the date that they became States).
--
Regards
Norman Harker MVP (Excel)
Sydney, Australia
(e-mail address removed)
"Amedee Van Gasse"
<nzrqrr.qvgzntjrt.ina.tnffr.qvgzntbbxjrt@orfgnngavrg.rztebhc.qbabgfcnz.or>
wrote in message
 
Not quite - though I suppose you can be forgiven your US history
niggles, Norman. The date depended upon who controlled the territories.
For instance, as a possession of France, all of the Louisiana Purchase
territory technically switched in 1582, even though the English colonies
waited until Great Britain switched in 1752, and Wyoming did not become
a state until 1890. The territory of Alaska switched in 1867, when the
US purchased it from Russia, but Alaska didn't become a state until 1959.
 
Hi JE!

Thanks for that; I was trying to simplify and screwed up! It must make
life difficult for historians trying to track exact sequences of
events sometimes. It's made worse by year numbers changing at the end
of March in the English colonies (which, by the way, we'll take off
your hands any time you like).
 
JE McGimpsey <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 01 jul 2004 een
briljante bijdrage in <Klik op deze link
om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:
Not quite - though I suppose you can be forgiven your US history
niggles, Norman. The date depended upon who controlled the
territories. For instance, as a possession of France, all of the
Louisiana Purchase territory technically switched in 1582, even though
the English colonies waited until Great Britain switched in 1752, and
Wyoming did not become a state until 1890. The territory of Alaska
switched in 1867, when the US purchased it from Russia, but Alaska
didn't become a state until 1959.

*sigh*
You leftponders always do it the hard way ;-)

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in dezelfde thread in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.
 
Unless someone managed to fill a depressed MS employed Excel programmer with
tequila (... hmm, how hard could that be ? :-), this would be just
unqualified guessing. Absolutely nothing is stated anyhwere.
One can of couse hope for the continuing lack of animated gifs and blinking
cell formats.

Let's rather reverse the question: Which imaginary new features would make
you folks pay -real money- for an upgrade ?
...

Let me summarize your categories as what we can expect from MSFT and what we
want. Goody!


What we can expect
------------------
1. Not only animated GIFs and blinking cells, but also screaming cells as sound
files are added to cell formats.

2. Changes in the object model such as the VolumeControl event which can be used
to enforce max settings.

3. In response to all those people who want to be able to build expiration dates
into their workbooks, a new workbook property that will FORCE running
Workbook_Open events, thus allowing Excel to catch up to IE in terms of security
vulnerabilities.

4. Typesize settings for worksheet tabs so users running under 1600x1200 can
resize their tabs to make them legible so that other users running at 800x600
opening those workbooks can have most of their document windows filled with the
worksheet tabs.

5. You don't want to imagine how they're going to 'improve' AutoCorrect.

6. Yet another new help system, this time with pop-ups and direct links to MSN.

7. An Esperanto work-alike for BAHTTEXT.

8. You don't want to imagine how they're going to 'improve' the Task Pain.


What we shouldn't get our hopes up about
----------------------------------------
1. Larger worksheets.

2. New worksheet functions.

3. New *useful* options, such as a toggle for whether or not to pass CSV files
through the Text Import wizard.

4. Sensible things like allowing SUMIF and COUNTIF to accept 3D references and
multiple area ranges, defaulting the IRR seed interest rate to -0.5 or -0.9,
which both work a lot better than the current default, adding more 3D
functionality such as treating 3D references as if they were multiple area
ranges in INDEX calls, for that matter allowing INDEX to return an array result
when 2nd and 3rd arguments are positive scalars but the 4th argument is an
array, and allowing MODE to accept multiple area ranges and 3D references, which
both AVERAGE and MEDIAN can handle (since LARGE and SMALL both accept 3D
references, any claims that MODE would need too much storage to do this should
be taken with a boulder-size grain of salt).

5. Fixing the errors in the help files.

6. Word-like extended patterns for use in Edit > Replace (but not to worry, it's
likely you will be able to seach for animated GIFs and sound files as part of
the formatting).

7. Documentation on what exactly is returned by OFFSET(A1,{0;1;2},{3,4}) or
INDIRECT when passed an array as 1st argument.

8. A #BLANK! pseudo-error value that would be treated like a (gasp! what a
concept!) blank cell in both chart ranges and formulas.
 
Harlan Grove <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 02 jul 2004 een
briljante bijdrage in <Klik op deze link
om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:
...
..

Let me summarize your categories as what we can expect from MSFT and
what we want. Goody!
...
What we shouldn't get our hopes up about
----------------------------------------
...
6. Word-like extended patterns for use in Edit > Replace (but not to
worry, it's likely you will be able to seach for animated GIFs and
sound files as part of the formatting).
...

Regular Expressions!!!
That's what I would really, *really* like to see in Excel and Word.
Though I think if it would ever be added, it would be some .NET RegExp
library and not the RegExp flavor used by Perl 5 (which is the most
popular one, and deservedly so!)

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in dezelfde thread in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.
 
Norman Harker said:
Thanks for that; I was trying to simplify and screwed up! It must make
life difficult for historians trying to track exact sequences of
events sometimes. It's made worse by year numbers changing at the end
of March in the English colonies (which, by the way, we'll take off
your hands any time you like).

As far as I'm concerned, you're welcome to them! There's a strict
"no-returns" policy, however...
 
Harald Staff <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 30 jun 2004 een
briljante bijdrage in <Klik op deze link
om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:
Unless someone managed to fill a depressed MS employed Excel
programmer with tequila (... hmm, how hard could that be ? :-), this
would be just unqualified guessing. Absolutely nothing is stated
anyhwere. One can of couse hope for the continuing lack of animated
gifs and blinking cell formats.

Let's rather reverse the question: Which imaginary new features would
make you folks pay -real money- for an upgrade ?

Modeless property dialogs, like in StarOffice/OpenOffice, Lotus 1-2-3,
Coreldraw, Dreamweaver,...

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in dezelfde thread in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.
 
Extend the functionality of INDIRECT so it works, at least, as good as
Lotus' @@ function.

--
Regards
Andy Wiggins
www.BygSoftware.com
Home of "Save and BackUp",
"The Excel Auditor" and "Byg Tools for VBA"



"Amedee Van Gasse"
 
Extend the functionality of INDIRECT so it works, at least, as good as
Lotus' @@ function.
...

That'd be a more fundamental change, and not one that's likely to come by
changing INDIRECT, though I'd also welcome the added functionality you're
implying.

The problem is that INDIRECT returns range references, and Excel's range
semantics differ significantly from those of 123. Specifically, Excel needs to
distinguish between ranges and arrays. 123 isn't burdened by this since it has
never had arrays.

That said, where I could see a useful change being made would be in ditching the
current external reference and DDE *syntax* in favor of the approach taken in
StarOffice/OpenOffice. in SO/OO, external references to other workbooks are
handled like DDE links, and both use a function named DDE that looks like

=DDE("soffice";"Untitled2";"Sheet1.A1:A3")

Looks like SO/OO treats itself as a DDE server. All arguments to its DDE
function are string *expressions*. While there's no good reason I can think of
to use anything other than text *constants* as first arguments, any expression
evaluating to text could be used for workbook (second argument) and 3D address
(third argument). This is a MUCH, MUCH BETTER approach than Excel's hoary
hardcoded syntax which may have made sense a decade ago but are in desperate
need of scrapping now.

Reality check: since Microsoft didn't figure this out, ipso facto this can't be
a valuable feature, so unlikely to be implemented until after Hell freezes over.

More fundamentally, I don't see anything remotely like this happening unless and
until Excel gains the ability to open multiple workbooks with the same base
filename at the same time. While I have no proof, I've developed the strongly
held belief that much of what's wrong with Excel with regard to working with
multiple linked workbooks can be traced back to a very unfortunate design
decision made for Excel 1.0 which ran on 512K Macs which had only a single disk
drive and a nonhierarchical file system.
 
Please forgive me butting into this thread but I have been trying to
get an answer on a indirect() problem that I have had in openoffice
question in relation to this function. It seemed from your reply that
you were pretty knowledgeable on this topic.

For example, if there is a named range called "apples" containging
some dates, with a header cell called "date" and a criteria to catch
any greater than zero dates, then:

=DMIN(apples;"Date";criteria) returns the correct value

but, if "apples" is in cell A6,

=DMIN(INDIRECT(A6);"Date";criteria) returns a 502 error

Have you come across such a situation/error? Any solution?

Thanks,

Geoff.
 
Please forgive me butting into this thread but I have been trying to
get an answer on a indirect() problem that I have had in openoffice
question in relation to this function. It seemed from your reply that
you were pretty knowledgeable on this topic.

For example, if there is a named range called "apples" containging
some dates, with a header cell called "date" and a criteria to catch
any greater than zero dates, then:

=DMIN(apples;"Date";criteria) returns the correct value

but, if "apples" is in cell A6,

=DMIN(INDIRECT(A6);"Date";criteria) returns a 502 error

Have you come across such a situation/error? Any solution?

Thanks,

Geoff.
 
Geoff Hicks said:
Please forgive me butting into this thread but I have been trying to
get an answer on a indirect() problem that I have had in openoffice
question in relation to this function. It seemed from your reply that
you were pretty knowledgeable on this topic.

For example, if there is a named range called "apples" containging
some dates, with a header cell called "date" and a criteria to catch
any greater than zero dates, then:

=DMIN(apples;"Date";criteria) returns the correct value

but, if "apples" is in cell A6,

=DMIN(INDIRECT(A6);"Date";criteria) returns a 502 error

Have you come across such a situation/error? Any solution?

No solution if you want to use OpenOffice. While OOo Calc does *most* of
what Excel does, it lacks much of Excel's array formula capabilities and
INDIRECT semantics. Actually, in this case it appears to be DMIN that's
underpowered.

File an enhancement request at the OpenOffice web site.
 
Hi,

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

Although I suspected that it was not possible in OO, I hoped it was.
Damn shame, as I make extensive use of INDIRECT() to grab information
from named ranges. Its use in Excel allows easy construction and
(more importantly) extension of worksheets.

Well, thanks again.

Regards,

Geoff.
 
Back
Top