Excel just entered its 40th year

janusz · 25 Oct 2024, 10:31 PM

Quote:

More senior than Windows itself, and still runs the world

Microsoft Excel Version 1.0 was released on the last day of September 1985, four decades ago.

Excel 1 was a Mac application, and originally a Mac-only application. The first Windows version only followed a few years later, when in 1987 Microsoft ported Excel 2 to Windows.

Excel will still cost you a few hundred bucks. That may be the best tribute to its staying power

Source: The Register

**CyberSmurf** · 26 Oct 2024, 12:45 AM

I remember when Excel for Windows and Word for Windows came with a bare bones version of Windows.

**CyberSmurf** · 26 Oct 2024, 01:59 AM

Interesting thing about Excel is that it did not take into account that there was no February 29th in the year 1900.

In Excel, day 1 was January 1st 1900.
When Microsoft released Access, they synced the dates on March 1st 1900 as day 61. In Access this means day 1 is December 31st 1899.

I discovered this on February 29th, 2000. I was running a routine in Access involving the DOS mm-dd-yy timestamp on files. The routine wasn't Y2K compatible, but it didn't matter. Except for that day where my function generated an error message.
For me it was serendipity because I had written a database where I used the day numbers and I couldn't understand why day 1 was December 31st 1899.

hadaso · 27 Oct 2024, 07:51 AM

John Walker writes about the MS Excel 29 February 1900 bug and more on dates in Excel here in his Fourmilab's Calendar Converter.

Grhm · 30 Oct 2024, 11:36 AM

Excel is great, but it would be even greater if they had stuck with and extended the original concept, instead of shoehorning in ugly new features that undermined its logical structure.

For example:

Giving the columns letters instead of numbers. (How many cells to the right of column Q is column AH?! Ridiculous.)

Introducing "merged cells", which prevent you from selecting a single column or row, instead of extending the principle of "center across columns" so that you could, for example "center down rows" or "right align across columns".

Changing the way lines on cell borders were defined so that it became ambiguous.

Abandoning the straightforward and elegant Excel 5 Macro language and replacing it with the cumbersome and hard-to-understand "Visual Basic".

I could go on.

...And I often do !

30 Oct 2024, 11:36 AM	#5
Grhm Essential Contributor Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: UK Posts: 282	Excel is great, but it would be even greater if they had stuck with and extended the original concept, instead of shoehorning in ugly new features that undermined its logical structure. For example: Giving the columns letters instead of numbers. (How many cells to the right of column Q is column AH?! Ridiculous.) Introducing "merged cells", which prevent you from selecting a single column or row, instead of extending the principle of "center across columns" so that you could, for example "center down rows" or "right align across columns". Changing the way lines on cell borders were defined so that it became ambiguous. Abandoning the straightforward and elegant Excel 5 Macro language and replacing it with the cumbersome and hard-to-understand "Visual Basic". I could go on. ...And I often do ! Last edited by Grhm : 30 Oct 2024 at 11:51 AM.

26 Oct 2024, 12:45 AM	#2
CyberSmurf Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: British Columbia Posts: 4,043	I remember when Excel for Windows and Word for Windows came with a bare bones version of Windows.

26 Oct 2024, 01:59 AM	#3
CyberSmurf Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: British Columbia Posts: 4,043	Interesting thing about Excel is that it did not take into account that there was no February 29th in the year 1900. In Excel, day 1 was January 1st 1900. When Microsoft released Access, they synced the dates on March 1st 1900 as day 61. In Access this means day 1 is December 31st 1899. I discovered this on February 29th, 2000. I was running a routine in Access involving the DOS mm-dd-yy timestamp on files. The routine wasn't Y2K compatible, but it didn't matter. Except for that day where my function generated an error message. For me it was serendipity because I had written a database where I used the day numbers and I couldn't understand why day 1 was December 31st 1899.

27 Oct 2024, 07:51 AM	#4
hadaso The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Holon, Israel. Posts: 4,992	John Walker writes about the MS Excel 29 February 1900 bug and more on dates in Excel here in his Fourmilab's Calendar Converter.