Just bought a new computer, and it has Excel 2007 included. Now, I’ve used Excel 2003 for years, and am perfectly satisfied with it. However, from looking at the basic screen for 2007 it looks like there would be a big learning curve required to arrive at the same degree of competence that I have with 2003.
My question is this: Does the newer program have ANY features that warrant going thru the agony of learning what is basically a new prgram? Frankly I don’t think there would be, and am about ready to scrub 2007 from the computer and install the 2003 version. However, I’d like to hear from any of you Excel experts - what is your experience here?
I have two files that are too large to open with Excel 2003. I thought 2007 would make things easier, but it didn’t for me. At the office I’d have to use RDC to connect to the remote server where it lives. At home I connect with RDC, and then I’d have to connect to RDC through RDC. Even though I go through a lot of monkey motions to work with the files, it’s still easier to used 2003. Had I had 2007 from the outset, that wouldn’t be the case.
Does 2007 have a limit for writing .txt files? When I save a file in 2003 it’s either tab delimited so the columns do not line up (I need to have fixed-format text files), or else the columns are in the right place but the first part of the records are at the top of the file and the ends of the records are at the bottom of the file.
It’s easier to just use the procedure I have. I could have my Mac configured to connect to the server RDC, but I have a program on my office PC that has to run on that PC and can’t be on (or accessed through) the server. So I connect directly to my desktop.
I don’t know VBA and don’t have time to take a class in it.
First of all, here is a Microsoft page describing the changes in Excel 2007. And I think the big change you’d notice in Office 2007 is the ribbon interface, replacing the menu in previous versions of Office. My understanding is that context-sensitive Ribbon is supposed to help users increase productivity. (Supposedly, when they were designing Office 2007, they surveyed people to find out what features were desired. But they found that many of the things that people were asking for were already in Office, but buried in the menu system. So the new interface is supposed to make these features easier to find.)
The ribbon is the future. Office 2007 is already 3 years old and its recently-released sucessor, Office 2010, has the ribbon all the Office apps they didn’t *quite *finish in time for 2010.
The 2003 to 2007 transition feels really weird for a couple weeks. Then you’re over it. There really are a lot of ways that 2007 & 2010 are better than 2003. As just one example, the new file format is far more stable & reliable for large or complex files.
You may recall that the Win95 interface felt really weird when you were used to Win 3.1. I assume you’ve gotten past that by now.
Deciding to stick with an old version oof anything because the new version interface is unfamiliar is probably the worst possible reason.
Go ahead and learn it from a book. I did, and it didn’t take long to be able to program some fairly complex stuff.
I like the ribbon–it’s easy to program (even though you do have to learn a second programming language, XML, to do it, you don’t have to learn a lot of it), and you can do a lot with it. I just wish there were more icons! The default icon set doesn’t give you a lot of choice.
But what I’m really loving is Excel 2010 Beta. More conditional formatting options, pivot tables from more than one data source, and extended ribbon code? Works for me.
As for the most of us, 2007 probably won’t give you much more than …Lotus 123 or 2003. One great disadvantage is compatability, many reciepients can’even open the “new” file except in Open Office. Otherwise, as with all M$ newbies, for certain things, it’s easier, the ribbon is quite good, integration is better, the help system is better, and the whole thing is much too sophisticated for the common user. It all depends on your needs, but at one point you will be obliged to upgrade, or go outside M$. We have done it, without too much damage, but it did oblige us to invest in ADOBE so to send in PDF … cost on top of M$ and not negligeable.
Not when you’re over 80 YO it ain’t. Young whippersnappers.
Thanks for the link to Microsoft’s list of changes. A brief perusal of this didn’t bring out any “Oh gotta have that feature” items. May play with the new version for a while yet, but it’s not looking good for it. Thanks to all for your advice.
With Office 2007, Microsoft changed file types (docx, xlsx, etc) and you either need 2007/2010 to open the files or an extension for 2003 (which is free). With this change, MS is really trying to push everyone forward.
Office 2003 is a seven year old suite. Office 2007 is even three years old now. Office 2010 is shipping now.
You are eventually going to need to figure out the Office ribbon system, as it’s not going away. Docx and xlsx will be the standard file formats and people will start to hem and haw when you can’t/won’t use them. You will see less and less help online for 2003 products.
You have Office 2007 and it’s free. You need to take the plunge now and get used to it, because the new way Office works is here to stay. Seven years old is ancient in computing. I know it sucks, but you have to move forward.
I haven’t used anything in 2007 I haven’t used in 2003 and I do macros and some complex stuff. I don’t like the format as to me it makes it look like something for kindergardeners.
I never thought pivot tables were that hard to create in 2003. But I guess that could be a benefit.
The biggest thing I noticed is it is easier to export Excel data to other software programs
The increase in rows and columns could be a good thing, but when I needed more than they had in Excel 2003, I switched to Access.
But I grew up leaning the command interfaces of Lotus and Wordperfect
I think a lot of people use Excel for entire programs whereas if I needed it I would use Access and just use Excel to provide the data. Then use Access for the program. More people now are using vbase and having the entire program in Excel only.
For the normal user 2007 isn’t an improvement. It’s nice that they increased the number of rows but it isn’t a database program and shouldn’t be used like one. I found actual flaws in it that weren’t deal breakers but come-on. If you want to improve upon a program at least beta test it on prisoners first. I’m getting tired of being the Microsoft guinea pig. I fell like I should get a paycheck for it.
I like the conditional format feature. You can take a column of numbers and have it display the largest in the column as green. Makes it easier to find things.
It’s not really a new program. The menu interface is quite different but not so many features have changed. I am not a ribbon lover but I do like some of the new features. I am a power user who also does a lot of VBA programming. Here are the things I have noticed most in the six months or so I have been using 2007:
Conditional formatting is much more powerful.
Pivot tables work the same but here is one area where I believe the UI has improved.
I find the chart data series interface harder to use though charting works basically the same. The look of the charts is a nice update.
You are longer restricted to a relatively small numbers of colors in a palette; you now have full access to RGB colors, just like Word.
The big thing that is a negative for me is the inability to easily customize the ribbon by adding toolbars, and adding buttons where I need them for existing functions or for macros.
There are a few new powerful functions that allow multiple conditions, like SUMIFS (compare to SUMIF).
ETA: The one thing I really dislike is the inability to easily add my own toolbars and buttons wherever I need them most to access existing features or more importantly, macros.
Well, there’s the fact that the ribbon is going to be standard in virtually every Microsoft program (and probably others if it catches on) from here on out. Wouldn’t it be simpler just to learn it now rather than putting off the inevitable?
In all honesty, the learning curve isn’t that bad. Microsoft did a ton of user experience research and saw that it’s not that difficult to adjust and that a majority of users agreed they saw a speed increase and increase in productivity.
All you really need to do is click through the ribbons and learn where they put everything. That takes what, 10 minutes max? For everything else there’s this appropriately named “Help” feature…
The only downfall I suppose is the fact that you can’t customize the ribbon, but that will be changed in Office 2010. Other than that, the ribbon is here to stay, so embrace it.
Perhaps I am not the typical user. I use these apps regularly and am very familiar with features that are probably used by a small percentage of the total user base. I have really internalized the sequences to do most tasks, and adjusting to a new arrangement takes much more than 10 minutes. It has taken me several weeks, if not months, to become as effective using the ribbon as I was with the previous interface, because I had to consciously think about every command. If you want to insert a row, and you intuitively go to the Insert panel, it’s not there. To protect a worksheet, you have to go, strangely, to the Review panel, which is otherwise the support for tracking changes. Those changes take time to internalize, and it doesn’t just happen the first time you do it. Similarly, I have been using Word since it was a DOS program, and old habits die hard. If I were a brand new user and this was the only interface I had ever known perhaps it would be more efficient. YMMV.
Well, sure, but you could always customize everything through VBA so customizing through an XML language is not exactly a gift. The previous version gave you the ability to virtually create your own user interface, if that’s what you wanted to do, just by clicking and dragging. You can still customize the Quick-Access Toolbar, but it’s only one toolbar, and there is a limit as to how many buttons it will display.
But that’s progress. I agree that the smart strategy is to find a way to make it work for you rather than fighting the inevitable.