Feedback by UserVoice

Kenneth Barber

My feedback

  1. 120 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
  2. 43 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
  3. 81 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
  4. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    The " are supposed to be ".

    Kenneth Barber shared this idea  · 
  5. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    This already exists.
    =SUBSTITUTE("abcde","a","-")
    =SUBSTITUTE(SUBSTITUTE("abcde","a","-"),"e","/")

  6. 3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
  7. 7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    I totally agree!

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
  8. 14 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    I would say that the filter on the slicer's field should only be removed if that field does not appear in the PivotTable. When the field appears in the PivotTable, you have the choice of filtering using the filters on the PivotTable or filtering by slicer, so in these cases, there is no reason why the slicer should dominate.

    Also, any filters can be added or removed from the Field List pane, so in a sense, the current behaviour is just fine.

  9. 465 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    Center Across Selection is by far better than Merge if you are only centering horizontally, since you can rearrange columns without having to unmerge first.

    It's unfortunate that Merge is more popular and so finds it place in the Ribbon. Same goes for VLOOKUP versus INDEX and MATCH...

  10. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    OK, now I see what you mean. It's easy to reason through what is going on. Excel fills down until the end of your selection, and since you selected the whole column, it fills the whole column. You instead want to select only the cells that you actually want to be filled.

    This can be easily solved if you use tables. Select your data, go to the Insert tab, and click on Table. When you select table columns, you only get the data and not the blank cells underneath.

    I should also mention that most data that is filled down would have a column heading, so most people wouldn't try to fill the whole column because it would fill the column heading, not the number or formula underneath.

    Lastly, the idea of the last row of your existing data is ambiguous. Suppose that you have data in A1:A10 and D1:D20. Suppose that you enter a value in B1, select column B, and fill down. Should it fill down only to B10 because your value is clearly associated with the A1:A10 range, or should it fill down to B20 because that is the end of all data in your sheet?

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    I can't reproduce what you are describing. Can you upload a sample workbook somewhere and give us the link, or give us specific instructions on how to produce this behaviour starting with a blank sheet?

  11. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    Is this suggestion for Excel Online?

  12. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    You mean just a bunch of borders on a blank 9 × 9 grid? Or do you mean that it should create a Sudoku puzzle for you? Remember that it is possible to create an unsolvable Sudoku puzzle, so you probably don't want to type the numbers in yourself. It's probably better if you just find a Sudoku puzzle generator on the Internet.

  13. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    Your post is generalized in the one linked below, since you can have repetitions in formulas in general, not just the IF function.
    https://excel.uservoice.com/forums/304921-excel-for-windows-desktop-application/suggestions/10099254-support-inline-variables-in-formulas-similar-to-p

    You are right that X will calculate twice, and you can check this yourself using Evaluate Formula in the Formulas tab. To minimize the processing time, extract any repeated calculations into their own cells. If you are worried about the helper cells taking up visual space, you can hide the columns that they are in or move the helper cells to a different sheet.

    I'm not sure what you are getting at in your last paragraph.

  14. 46 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    In that case, while you wait for your suggestion to be implemented, you could use the Name Manager to get the syntax that you've suggested.

    If you want the end of column A, define a name "A" whose formula is =INDEX(A:A,ROWS(A:A)). Then you can literally just write A2:A like in your suggestion, and it will work.

    Rows are a bit different, since you can't have a name that is a number, but the same concept applies.

    The disadvantage is that you would need 1 name per column whose end that you want.

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    I still say that you should put your data into a table (select your data, and then Insert tab → Table or Ctrl + T). Tables extend only as far down as you let them, and as the number of rows in the tables changes, the references to the table columns do not change.

    Conditional formatting doesn't support the table style of reference (e.g. Table[Column]), so you will still have to use the A1:A2 style of reference for your columns. However, the conditional formatting is smart enough to change the column reference as the number of rows changes.

    Give it a try!

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    You can already do this. Use Insert tab → Table or Ctrl + T to transform your data into a table. Then you can reference the table column rather than the sheet column.

    If you cannot use a table, use a reference like A2:INDEX(A:A,ROWS(A:A)).

    Explanation:
    It's not just cell references that are valid in the A1:B2 syntax. Anything that returns a reference can be used. In this case, we have A2:INDEX(). INDEX returns a reference to the cell at a given position (ROWS(A:A)) in the given array (A:A). ROWS(A:A) is the number of rows in column A. Using it in INDEX gives us a reference to the last cell in column A.

  15. 3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    You are right that tables are supposed to get rid of the A1 notation, hence the "current row" ([@[Column]]) syntax. This, combined with the "whole column" syntax, help to achieve another goal of tables: the order of the rows shouldn't matter. This means that you can sort your table, move rows around, etc. and the table still works the same.

    The way that you are using the tables, you are forcing both tables to be in the same order as each other. They're not meant for that.

    And I still don't understand in what case you would need 2 tables to have a 1:1 relationship with each other, with the corresponding rows being in the same position within their respective tables, and where you can't/shouldn't combine them into a single table.

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    I think that you are misunderstanding the structured reference syntax.

    The Table[Column] syntax is a reference to the entire table column. Really, I would think that if a single cell uses =Table[Column], it shouldn't return anything, since it doesn't make sense for a single cell to return an entire column.

    The Table[@Column] syntax is a reference to the cell in Table[Column] that is in the same sheet row as the cell that is using the formula. Usually, you only use [@Column] within the same table as Column.

    If you need a column to reference all of the values in a column in another table in the exact same order, why not just combine your tables?

    If you cannot combine your tables, here is the solution to your problem. Suppose that you want values from Table1 to be referenced in Table2. In Table2, add a column called "Row". In the Row column, use the formula =ROW()-ROW([Row])+1 so that your rows are numbered 1, 2, 3, etc. In the column that is supposed to reference Table1[Column], use the formula =INDEX(Table1[Column],[@Row]) to return the cell in Table1[Column] at position [@Row].

  16. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    I meant that all of the clicking through the widget, even if the widget is perfectly responsive, might be slower than just typing the date in.

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    The widget might be more user-friendly, but it would also be slower in a lot of cases.

  17. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    Which templates?

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    What do you mean?

  18. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    It's a bit hard to follow your process, both in the original post and your comment. Do you have an example workbook that you can upload somewhere and can you post a link to it here?

    I should also mention that Power Query (AKA Get & Transform Data) probably has something for filtering for unique rows.

    From what I gather, maybe MATCH or VLOOKUP will help you? Use MATCH on one table to look into the other AND vice versa. MATCH will return #N/A if it doesn't find a match. Your lookup value would be the concatenation of the content of all of your rows.

    Kenneth Barber commented  · 

    What Advanced Filter criteria do you use? I'm wondering if a PivotTable could help solve your problem.

  19. 18 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
  20. 7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Kenneth Barber supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1 3 4 5 37 38

Feedback and Knowledge Base