Share this content

Excel 2007 tips - find your way around the new version

23rd Jan 2008
Share this content
Kashflow logo

Replies (3)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By David160
27th Jan 2008 12:40

Too many upgrades
Often companies (not just computer software companies eg perfume, clothes etc.) upgrade just for the sake of producing a new version. This is done to increase sales. They can announce, look at our new bright whizzo programme. The reality is all they do is just do a lick of paint job. Lots of people believe them and go out and purchase.

Look at Sage, one upgrade a year, and no compatibility between the different versions. Over the years, I often cannot see any real improvement, we are just given a different way of doing things; which has to be learnt each year.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By David Carter
26th Jan 2008 22:33

Change is the price of progress
Obviously, the changes in Excel are a real pain, particularly for those people who are expert in existing versions.

But if you want a product to improve, that means it has to change. Upgrades are a necessary evil and users have to put with the short-term pain in order to attain greater benefits in the long-term.

It's always a temptation for software vendors to compromise new designs in order not to upset their installed base. But in the end that leads to mediocrity. If Microsoft believe that Excel needs radical changes at this stage in its life, then they should back their hunch and go with it.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
25th Jan 2008 07:53

Alternative view - M$ should bear the cost .....
What is the real cost to business of Excel 2007 or the Office 2007 suite as a whole - and more importantly who should bear this cost?

There has been a standard M$ 'look & feel' in place for some years now ever since they prided themselves on implementing (taking over) standards

This current interface is a radical departure from M$ own standards and as such there is a case for assessing the business costs involved and passing them on to M$

Its very simple really - legions have people have been trained or M$ certified (at great cost) on the previous versions of these programs and we now find all this is worthless. This is particularly galling, especicially in the light of M$ claim to be the arbiter of standards (which change at their convenience)

Frankly since M$ have changed the rules of the game they should bear the costs of implementing the relevant products. Rather than expecting users to pay to use them they should be providing hand-outs (in the order of the existing cost of Office 2007) to encourage take up

After all even a sweetner such as this would only partially offset the costs of dealing with M$ in the long term

Thanks (0)