Hello:
A corrupt sheet (perhaps more correctly a workbook, althougth it is possible
that it is caused by a mistake in a single sheet) is very possible. It can be
caused by a variety of things. If save directly to a removal drive such
as a CD or perhaps a network drive the chances increase that something will
not get saved correctly. Programs expect files to follow an exact format, one
byte out of line and file could be useless. Programs are terrible at seeing obvious
mistakes that humans see easily. (e.g. Call me at my toll free number: (80) 555-1212
You would figure it out quickly, a computer generally never will.
If that missing zero is in an Excel file in just the right/Wrong place the whole
file could be corrupt from Excel's standpoint.
It can also happen if you shut down your computer with properly shutting down
the operating system. Some use delayed disk writes which might not be completed.
There is a whole list of hardware related problems that could easily do it.
Although that has gotten significantly better in the last decade(s).
Finally, there is the event for which it is impossible to find a cause. There
probably is one, you just can't find it.
So it is very possible that you had nothing to do with it. But, if you now
feeling better, also realize that being a computer user you should be aware that
this can happen and take steps to mitigate its effect.
Basically that means having backups.
Pieter Vandenberg
: Pieter,
: A "corrupt sheet?" I've never heard of that. Is it possible that this
: wasn't actually my fault?! Is there a reason this happens or is it just one
: of those unfortunate, but inevitable things that happen on computers? Thanks
: for enlightening me.-- Ellen
: "vandenberg p" wrote:
:> Hello:
:>
:> I take it then that Excel is working otherwise, just not on this sheet(s).
:> That does indicate a corrupt sheet(s), rather than a corrupt Excel. I guess
:> the lesson would be to keep a backup (two is a minimum since if you
:> backup regularly you run a chance that the backup will be bad also.)
:>
:> Pieter Vandenberg
:>
:> : Pieter and Peter,
:>
:> : Thanks for your responses. The whole spreadsheet (and it's
:> : related spreadsheets) are now such a mess, I've given up and I'm redoing the
:> : whole thing. There are notes to circular references in places that don't
:> : even make sense. I'm sure the error is mine (somewhere), but I can't find
:> : the source. (And all the little arrows Excel is pointing in all directions
:> : are making me crazy).
:> : Peter, FYI, I've always found (until this incident) that dragging
:> : formulas works really well. I use "$" to make constants when necessary out
:> : of rows or columns (or both for a specific cell). It's really easy.
:> : In any case-- I appreciate your attempts to help me.
:> : Ellen
:>
:> : "Peter Robinson" wrote:
:>
:> :> I tended to find that if you just just drag one sum it keeps the same
:> :> formula. If you manually sum the next column and it produces the correct
:> :> value then highlight both and drag it across. Excel will then understand
:> :> that you intend to increase the cell references by one letter every time.
:> :>
:> :> Regards
:> :>
:> :> Peter
:> :>
:> :> "dicentra4" wrote:
:> :>
:> :> > Yes, it was set to "automatic." I re-set it to "manual" and then it summed
:> :> > one column as requested. However, when I tried to drag a formula across a
:> :> > row, both in automatic and manual, it kept the product the same all the way
:> :> > across the row (i.e., identical number in each cell, which is entirely
:> :> > incorrect). There's some really wrong here. I've been using this
:> :> > spreadsheet for a long time and I've never experienced anything like this.
:> :> > It's making me crazy! Do you have any other ideas?
:> :> >
:> :> > "vandenberg p" wrote:
:> :> >
:> :> > > Hello:
:> :> > >
:> :> > > Tools/option/calculation, is it set to automatic?
:> :> > >
:> :> > >
:> :> > > Pieter Vandenberg
:> :> > >
:> :> > >
:> :> > > : New problem. Suddenly I can't get any sums or products other than 0. I'm
:> :> > > : not a sophisticated Excel user, but I'm an experienced one. I can't figure
:> :> > > : out what's wrong!
:> :> > >
:>
