It is very rare that I sort using a header row. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE give us an option that makes no assumptions on my behalf.
I frequently sort in Excel. It is very rare that I sort using a header row. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE give us an option that makes no assumptions on my behalf. Let me set it to not include a header row unless I specifically tell it to. No macros. No special key combinations. No tricks like blank lines or special formatting. Allow me to turn it off unless I select it. Predictable behavior would be much superior to what has been implemented.
I'm sure that there will be others that want exactly the opposite - always on. Other people will want exactly what Microsoft guessed everyone wants. Give us a choice instead of forcing us to live with that guess. Microsoft should evaluate that concept every time it thinks it knows what everyone wants. "If the customer wants vanilla, give them vanilla!" (A quote from Lyle Berman every marketing person should know and take to heart.)
Make this option available as a patch for every version for which Microsoft is still providing patches.
I voted for this, but my interest is a little parallel rather than identical.
If I select a range, say A2:C6 with column titles in A1:C1, I am perfectly happy to have Excel figure I'd like to sort using titles. Because it works wonderfully the first sort... It sees A1:C1 as having the titles as it ought to do.
But the second sort, and all after the first... No. It forgets all about A1:C1 and now wants to use A2:C2 (i.e.: my first row of actual data).
So I get one use, then immediately it is not only useless, but would leave one row unsorted, and I have to do work to select not to use the feature.
As Mr. Mattsen clearly has experienced, and as I have though in a slightly different respect, this aspect of sorting in Excel needs some revamping.
A third way sorting goes wrong, if you will, is let's say I select A2:B6 in my example from earlier with C2:C6 still populated. It asks if I wish to expand my selection. All well and good (well, not to me because I take no shortcuts when manipulating data unless they are MORE reliable than physically doing whatever), BUT if I press Enter to move past it, accepting it — because, as often happens with my data, I am expecting the sort anything that looks like a number as a number question to pop up — when I realize my sloppy error, I have to start the sort all over again. It cannot go back to my selection: I must reselect my original selection. Even if actually did not care, I still end up with the larger selection selected. Since I sometimes need to next copy the sorted material out, having to re-select is obnoxious.
There are some other small things here too. Even something as simple as show five or so sort field boxes just waiting for columns to be selected and ignore the ones you leave empty instead of making us click to add one after another until we have all we need. Used to be that way...
Revamping... it's needed in the Sort arena.