Copying from 2007 (past 65Kth row) to 2003 - bug?

[Cartman]

Fill in 4 cells in 2007, A300000:B300001, putting in the values
1,2,3,4 to easily identify them. Select and copy the (square) range of
4 cells.
Open 2003 and paste to cell A3.

Interestingly, only the contents of (2007's) A65536:B65536 will be
pasted to 2003's cell A3. (or any destination in 2003). To verify, put
=row() & "C" & column() in A65536:B65536 and repeat.

Was this patched or something...or do you duplicate the behavior?

Same machine with dual 2003/2007 installation. 2003 is version SP2. I
can't tell you with my 2007. (Yes, that's right. 2007's
deproductivity interface is SO UTTERLY CLUELESSLY STUPID that you
don't have a help menu. And, no, even alt-H,A doesn't work)

 

[Don Guillett]

Fill in 4 cells in 2007, A300000:B300001, putting in the values
1,2,3,4 to easily identify them. Select and copy the (square) range of
4 cells.
Open 2003 and paste to cell A3.

Interestingly, only the contents of (2007's) A65536:B65536 will be
pasted to 2003's cell A3. (or any destination in 2003). To verify, put
=row() & "C" & column() in A65536:B65536 and repeat.

Was this patched or something...or do you duplicate the behavior?

Same machine with dual 2003/2007 installation. 2003 is version SP2. I
can't tell you with my 2007.  (Yes, that's right. 2007's
deproductivity interface is SO UTTERLY CLUELESSLY STUPID that you
don't have a help menu. And, no, even alt-H,A doesn't work)

Surely you are aware that the row limit prior to xl2007 is 65636 rows..

 

[Cartman]

Surely you are aware that the row limit prior to xl2007 is 65636 rows..

Don, I'm copying 2 rows only. I'm copying from 2 high rows in 07 to 2
low rows in 03. I'm not copying 65K rows. And 2 columns.

Copying from rows 300,000 to 300,001 picks up the contents of row
65536 only. Try it and you'll be likewise shocked. (Unless there's an
odd reason such as service pack patch)

Just to clarify that this is bizarre, copy from A6 to AA10 in '07 to
anyplace in '03 (above the bottom 5 rows, of course). It will copy all
5 rows of the range, as you'd expect. But if you copy from high rows
in '07 - it's bogus.

By the way, this is not a referencing problem. Every cell in the
source is text or numeric values.

And finally, just as you'd expect, if I add the step of copying from
'07 to Notepad and recopy, normal pasting occurs in '03.

 

[Cartman]

Weird. I was speculating that it related to a 64K copy buffer line
restriction, a la really pathetic design like:
if copy_request {
....step 1: get pointer to every row for internal copying to Excel, so
I can copy 900,000 lines if I want
....step 2: fill WIndows copy buffer
..................SourceForWindowsCopyBuffStart = min(65536, what the
user actually specified)
..................SourceForWindowsCopyBuffEnd = min(65536, what the
user actually specified)
end if }
If true, this would be classic Microsoftian retarded programming and
consistent with their Third Commandment of God and Programming: "Ye
holy Microsoft programmer shallst decide what the user wanteth, for
thou knowest better than the user what he wanteth. Now goeth to thy
mirror and read how Time Magazine speaketh of thee Microsoft
programmers as geeks yet brilliant and innovative and whizkid thiseth
and thateth."

But that's NOT it, because Notepad gets the right stuff.

Could it be that there's some of that "min(65536,x)" logic in XL03?
IOW, might the copy buffer have a control field in it telling where it
came from in Excel, that is handled this way by '03? (It sure seems
that way, given that the extra Notepad step behaves differently)

BTW, I recall I've copied rows 300,000 through 365,000 from Access '03
to Excel '03 cell A1 - a common grind when copying in pieces from a
large >64K result set - and it picked up the right rows in that case.

 

[Jim Cone]

Confirmed here using both xl2007 and xl2010.
Copied 16 cells (A300000:d300003) and pasted into xl2003
Result was 4 blank cells, in the same row, selected.
Cut copy mode was still active in both xl2007/xl2010 after the paste.
---
After everybody in the world upgrades to xl2010 then that issue will go away.
'---
Jim Cone
Portland, Oregon USA
http://www.mediafire.com/PrimitiveSoftware
(free and commercial excel programs)



"Cartman"
<[email protected]>
wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

 

[Cartman]

Confirmed here using both xl2007 and xl2010.
Copied 16 cells (A300000:d300003) and pasted into xl2003
Result was 4 blank cells, in the same row, selected.
Cut copy mode was still active in both xl2007/xl2010 after the paste.

Thank you for checking. I have to assume by silence that either no one
dupes the problem or no one is using '03 (unlikely) or is not SP2. Let
me attempt to find out my '07 and SP version and see if that's a
factor.

On that matter, I'm really serious that I can't find the about page on
'07. It's offensive to me that I have to go Google the answer to how
to do something that used to be effortless and wasn't broken - not
even in the same universe as broken. It's insane that something as
rock steady as finding version by going menu-help/about (or alt-H,A)
is deemed dinosauric. Whether it's popular or not, McRitchie was or is
correct in his points that the '07 interface assassinates
productivity. I don't know that the whole world will go to '10 unless
they fix the productivity damage done by the '07 interface. I'm not
just talking of the paradigm adjustment mandated by the ribbon, and
not just the deficiencies of the "same shortcut keystroke sequences do
the same thing they did in '03" false claim. In fact the best
testimonial I've heard, from people I respect including J-W, is
something like "I've actually gotten to prefer the ribbon, and would
never ever go back now." But I have never heard anyone assert that
they are *more* productive, or accurate, with the '07 interface.

I think that what the Office team just doesn't fully understand is
that almost EVERYTHING is done faster and more accurately by the
keyboard (though I well understand and embrace the exceptions to that
statement, e.g. window resizing). If Scottie the Engineer did not
have voice command interface, he would be a typing madman, and
shortcut maniac - refer to ST IV to see what I mean The Office
interface people need to take care of productivity supergods, and the
'07 interface was a slap in their face. But I will confess that as to
'10, I haven't even looked at it, and even if it gives unlimited
unfettered sex, I don't plan to until I really must have a feature it
provides. '07 has been too costly as it is.

All I can think of for the bizarre pasting issue I'm seeing now is
that it's a version thing. I'm not thinking corruption since I can
reproduce with brand new workbooks. Having '03 on SP2 may be a rare
thing; perhaps nearly everyone is on SP3. I refrained from going SP3
due to scary problem reports I heard when it came out. Even if the
complaints were incorrect, or SP3 was fixed, or the problems were
inapplicable to me or whatever, I just had no clear compelling reason
to move up from SP2. I could be guilty of overkill paranoia on that
score; after all, there was no SP4.

Sorry for the ballistic rant. I deeply appreciate the help and the
effort you guys expend in the stellar help on the NG.

 

[Cartman]

Posted by me:

I have to assume by silence

Of course, I didn't mean you Jim. Your negative confirmation could
prove useful in this mystery.

 

[Michael Bednarek]

On Nov 15, 6:42 pm, "Jim Cone" wrote: [snip]

After everybody in the world upgrades to xl2010 then that issue will go away.

[snip]
Whether it's popular or not, McRitchie was or is
correct in his points that the '07 interface assassinates
productivity. I don't know that the whole world will go to '10 unless
they fix the productivity damage done by the '07 interface. [snip]
I think that what the Office team just doesn't fully understand is
that almost EVERYTHING is done faster and more accurately by the
keyboard [snip]
The Office
interface people need to take care of productivity supergods, and the
'07 interface was a slap in their face. But I will confess that as to
'10, I haven't even looked at it, and even if it gives unlimited
unfettered sex, I don't plan to until I really must have a feature it
provides. '07 has been too costly as it is.

I think '10 provides some mitigation against the maddest '07
stupidities.

[snip]

Sorry for the ballistic rant.

[snip

Thank you.

Haing moved from in-house Exchange to BPOS Exchange Online, we are now
forcibly being migrated to Office 365 / Exchange 2010. This will require
us to migrate from Outlook 2003 to '10. Not much of a problem as not
many productivity features are involved in deleting (and reading the odd
one) e-mails. VBA automation currently in place will probably work, and
it sells at Aamzon for $110 instead of the $190 Microsoft is asking. BUT
.... there is no way we will abandon a reasonably efficient platform on
which we do our office work for something that is completely alien to
everybody's methods.

Sorry for wandering further off-topic.