Excel 2007

[Brettjg]

Hello out there. I'm currently using XP 2003 with Excel 2003 and I've got a
particular suite of pretty intricate spreadsheets that use about 1mb of VB
code.

I've heard that upgrading to Excel 2007/Vista is not so easy to do because
of incompatibility, and I don't want the grief of a complete
rewrite/modification. On the other hand I'm sick to bloody death of Excel
2003 crashing because it feels like it.

What are your thoughts please? I'm happy to hear many views on this.
Regards, Brett.

 

[Bob Phillips]

I run Excel 2003 extensively, for some intricate applications, and I just do
not get the regular crashing of Excel that you describe. In fact 2003 is by
far the most stable, the best Excel that I have ever used.

Excel 2007 has had a fair amount of work to make it more efficient, and more
secure, but not stable AFAIK. The VBA is not very different and so should
not present too many compatibility issues (biggest change is probably that
FileSearch is gone), but the object model is very different and may require
coding changes. There is no simple answer I am afraid, it is a case of
migrating and testing it. I have many apps that have migrated with no
changes, many that have needed changes, but in most cases where the change
has been larger has been because I decided to do different thins in the 2007
version.

The other thing to note is that 2007 is very different in terms of the user
experience than 2003. Some love it, some don't - it is the marmite of
spreadsheets.

 

[Brettjg]

Hi Bob, thanks for your thoughts. Here's a typical example of the rubbish I
have to put up with in Excel 2003. While a macro was running just now, you
sent me your response, so I clicked on "Read the response" in Outlook, and
Excel crashed. I would have thought that you should be able to use a modern
computer with more than one window while a macro is running. BTW, I posted a
further question to your about the bold font thing. The Textframe doesn't
work with a shape array apparently. Thanks, Brett

 

[Ron Rosenfeld]

The other thing to note is that 2007 is very different in terms of the user
experience than 2003. Some love it, some don't - it is the marmite of
spreadsheets.

marmite of spreadsheets ???? I don't understand.

Marmite: a metal or earthenware cooking pot with a cover, usually large and
often having legs
--ron

 

[Bob Phillips]

Hi Ron,

Lol! No, over here Marmite is a beef extract product. It is one of those
things that divide people, they either love it or they hate it, no
in-betweens. The company even ride the wave with a advertising campaign
based on this social phenomena.

 

[Bob Phillips]

Quite honestly mate, that sounds like a system problem, I don't suffer such
problems.

Responded on the other thread too!

 

[Ron Rosenfeld]

Hi Ron,

Lol! No, over here Marmite is a beef extract product. It is one of those
things that divide people, they either love it or they hate it, no
in-betweens. The company even ride the wave with a advertising campaign
based on this social phenomena.

Aha! That was not listed in my dictionary -- I should have done a Google
search. Of course, the response might have been that it was dangerous to my
health, depending on when I did the search. )
--ron

 

[Andrew]

Hello out there. I'm currently using XP 2003 with Excel 2003 and I've gota
particular suite of pretty intricate spreadsheets that use about 1mb of VB
code.

I've heard that upgrading to Excel 2007/Vista is not so easy to do because
of incompatibility, and I don't want the grief of a complete
rewrite/modification. On the other hand I'm sick to bloody death of Excel
2003 crashing because it feels like it.

What are your thoughts please? I'm happy to hear many views on this.
Regards, Brett.

I have used both Excel 2003 and Excel 2007 extensively. I prefer
Excel 2003. However, I have not had the same "crashing" experiences
that you obviously had. Excel 2007 is much slower and 2003, and it
offers pretty close to zero improvements in functionality. The
"ribbon" system is different than the drop down menu style, but it
isn't better. The only positive difference I have noted so far is
that the spreadsheets are much larger. This may be why it takes
sometimes 5 seconds to save a document. And 2007 produces (by
default) documents in a format which is unreadable by 2003. This may
be an effective business strategy, but it is a horrible idea for
software development. You can modify the default type to match Excel
2003. I wouldn't recommend Excel 2007. In my opinion, Excel 2003 is a
better system.

 

[Jim Cone]

Is the 1mb of code all in one module?
--
Jim Cone
Portland, Oregon USA



"Brettjg"
<[email protected]>
wrote in message
Hello out there. I'm currently using XP 2003 with Excel 2003 and I've got a
particular suite of pretty intricate spreadsheets that use about 1mb of VB
code.

I've heard that upgrading to Excel 2007/Vista is not so easy to do because
of incompatibility, and I don't want the grief of a complete
rewrite/modification. On the other hand I'm sick to bloody death of Excel
2003 crashing because it feels like it.

What are your thoughts please? I'm happy to hear many views on this.
Regards, Brett.

 

[Brettjg]

Hi Jim, no the code is split up into 20 or more modules in PERSONAL.xls

 

[Brettjg]

Thanks for your thoughtd and help Bon

Quite honestly mate, that sounds like a system problem, I don't suffer such
problems.

Responded on the other thread too!

--
__________________________________
HTH

Bob

 

[Brettjg]

Thanks for your thoughts Andrew

I have used both Excel 2003 and Excel 2007 extensively. I prefer
Excel 2003. However, I have not had the same "crashing" experiences
that you obviously had. Excel 2007 is much slower and 2003, and it
offers pretty close to zero improvements in functionality. The
"ribbon" system is different than the drop down menu style, but it
isn't better. The only positive difference I have noted so far is
that the spreadsheets are much larger. This may be why it takes
sometimes 5 seconds to save a document. And 2007 produces (by
default) documents in a format which is unreadable by 2003. This may
be an effective business strategy, but it is a horrible idea for
software development. You can modify the default type to match Excel
2003. I wouldn't recommend Excel 2007. In my opinion, Excel 2003 is a
better system.

 

[Brettjg]

Thanks for your thoughts Simon.

One other thing of note is, i believe, that Excel 2003 can only ever
consume a maximum of 1Gb of memory, where Excel 2007 can be as voracious
as the system allows. Maybe you have too many processes going on, is it
a single core processor?, perhaps you should hit Ctrl+Shift+Del and look
at the processes running and how much CPU resources are being taken by
the particular processes, and, if possible, turn them off.



--
Simon Lloyd

Regards,
Simon Lloyd
'The Code Cage' (http://www.thecodecage.com)