Feedback by UserVoice

Rob

My feedback

  1. 1,054 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Thanks again for all the passion on this issue – we hear you and we’ll get someone on the team to dig in to the issue. I’ve seen a few related sub-issues while scanning over the comment section for this one, so we may reach out to a few of you for clarifications. Thanks again for all the votes, and keep them coming for the issues you care about!

    John, Excel

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    @Evan: I'm with you 100%. My point was more that there has to be a reason MS did this in the first place, and the reason they haven't fixed it may be due to there being a lot of (lucrative) users who want it.

    Now, that doesn't in any way excuse having not made it optional in the first place...
    ...or having not fixed it so it's optional after all these years of complaints...
    ...or having been so thick as to not realize it was going to be a problem for a TON of users.

    At this point, I'm thinking the code is a bloated, tangled mess (FFS, the app is 916MB when 10 years ago it was 58MB) and fixing this would be a bigger project than any of us imagine. Doesn't mean they shouldn't get on it.

    Just saying there might be more to it than we know. Of course, the REASON we don't know is because when MS folks haven't stopped by in 2+ years, despite having raised our hopes.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    I hate this functionality too, and Microsoft NEEDs to make it possible to turn it off, so people who work with one workbook at time don't have to deal with potentially dangerous Undos.

    But keep in mind, everyone who thinks global undo is "silly" and asks if the developers have ever used their own product, that Excel's bread-and-butter is corporate power-users for whom this behavior is beneficial.

    Microsoft didn't pull this functionality out of their backsides. There's a reason for it. A good reason, in fact. Where they screwed the pooch was in making it the default with no option to turn it off, thereby demonstrating no consideration for their *common folk* users.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    @Anonymous on 2020-02-21: Hit the nail on the head. I *do* understand why MS wanted to make undo stacks global. I understand why power-users might need that. But there's just NO excuse for not making it optional. 1) They *must* have known that the vast majority of Excel users will never need this feature, and 2) as you've so perfectly pointed out, they didn't think through the work flow and how this rotten execution bleeds over into other functionality. It's terribly botched in execution. But I suppose that shouldn't come as any surprise for software as bloated with code as Excel. There may truly be no equal for spreadsheet apps, but 1.64GB for a single app just screams "Our app is full of dead-wood code leftover from 15 years ago."

    For my use case, which is fairly sophisticated, Excel 2008 still does 95% of everything I need, and it's only 58MB (97% smaller than Excel 2016), and has 90% fewer bugs. Of course, the devil is in the details, and that last 5% of improved functionality is stuff I *really* need, so I'm stuck using this bloated, bug-riddled version of Excel that doesn't think like its users think.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    > I seriously cannot understand why this isn't the default. Can you imagine if Word had this behavior default?

    To be fair, Word documents that need to reference each other in a live manner aren't really a thing. Excel workbooks can — and frequently do — pull data from each other. So having a global undo is something that would be terrible to be without *IF YOU NEED IT*.

    But the fact is, it's a pro feature. It's not needed by the vast, vast, vast majority of users.

    The behavior should be an easily-set user preference.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    John from Excel, how about just giving us another keystroke for "undo in this workbook only"?

    CTRL+Z for undo within a workbook (because I'm sure the vast, vast majority of Excel users don't need the cross-workbook undo), and CTRL+ALT+Z for cross-workbook undo.

    And on Mac (where I'm working) CMD+Z and CMD+OPT+Z. A person who needs cross-workbook undo can *always* use one, and a person who doesn't can *always* use the other. I think that would solve the problem.

    FYI, Tina Ess, if "it never happened before" to you, you've been lucky. This has been a problem since at least 2003.

    Here's a SuperUser thread from 2011 where someone is seeking a solution to this problem.

    https://superuser.com/questions/293044/excel-how-to-undo-in-current-file-only

    It includes an explanation of why this issue exists and why it's hard for Microsoft to remove it: "MS does this for Excel only due to cross-workbook references. The only way they can maintain integrity of formula relationships in that context is to maintain a single undo history."

    In other words, it's vital for anyone who frequently uses a lot of formulas referencing other workbooks. I can understand how that might be the case. But speaking as someone who has never done that and probably never will, the majority of Excel users shouldn't have to pay the price on a regular basis for the sake of a feature used only by super-Excel pros.

    Rob supported this idea  · 
  2. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Excel for Mac » Formulas and Functions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Rob shared this idea  · 
  3. 6 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Excel for the web » Formulas and Functions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    When you're inside the Formula Bar, you can F4 (Windows) or CMD+T (Mac) to toggle between relative, absolute, and mixed.

  4. 7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    This absolutely (pardon me) needs to happen. I'm in the middle of editing dozens of cells one at a time because this very obvious functionality doesn't exist.

    Also, apparently it's impossible to toggle between relative and absolute except via keyboard shortcut — no Menu item, no Ribbon button. Seriously?

    Rob supported this idea  · 
  5. 59 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    1000%. I can't think of any reason why having merged cells in the row could possibly make any difference.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Rob commented  · 

    It's absurd that merging a cell makes it not possible to AutoFit the height. And even if there's a good reason, there's no excuse at all for having AutoFit Row Height available if it can't be used. It should be grayed out, so users at least understand it won't work, even if they don't know why.

    But #1, make it possible to AutoFit Row Height regardless of merged cells. I need this badly for cells in which I'm making lists with line breaks within the cell.

  6. 5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Excel for Mac » Formatting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Rob shared this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base