Do you mean functions like LINEST and also UDFs? As far as I know, the user
still must make a guess. If I am not sure the output size, and I don't care
what it looks like, I'll select a range I know is more than adequate, and
the extra rows and columns are simply filled with #N/A.

- Jon
-------
Jon Peltier, Microsoft Excel MVP
Tutorials and Custom Solutions
Peltier Technical Services, Inc. - http://PeltierTech.com
_______


"Morten Hvidberg-Knudsen"
wrote in message ...
Sorry to bother you with all my questions. Feel free to ignore.

Are there any changes in 2007 (positive or otherwise) with respects to
array functions (either native or those written in VBA)?
I like the feature a lot (for many reasons) but there was not a lot
support
in using them in 2003 (e.g. no easy way of determining the size of the
output
range they require, and no warning if the guess was too small)

Morten

"Jon Peltier" wrote:


"Morten Hvidberg-Knudsen"

wrote:

But apart from the look and feel, are the any improvements in 2007 (do
you
have a link?) (i.e: is the struggle worth while ?)

IMO the improvements are too few and far between to make up for the
labyrinthine user interface and related deterioration in productivity.
And
BTW, I don't really think the look and feel is an improvement for most
experienced users. Excel 2003 is still my version of choice for my "real
work". I have clients spread over the spectrum from 2000 (small declining
numbers) through 2007 (small but rapidly increasing numbers). Most of my
work in 2007 involves upgrading custom menus and toolbars into custom
Ribbon
interface elements, and fixing code that's broken in 2007. Most code that
breaks in 2007 seems more related to earlier versions being more tolerant
of
poor programming practices than actual problems with 2007.

From my point of view the has been no major improvements in Excel since
Excel95 (apart from the ability to handle more rows). Reflecting of
course
that original object oriented Excel was incredibly well designed, but
anyhow.

There's something to be said for incremental improvement. Excel 97 was a
big
improvement over 95 with its larger grid and enhanced VBA. 2000 made
further
improvements including an upgrade to VBA and the introduction of pivot
charts. 2002 saw several enhancements to pivot tables and to some chart
options (data label options come to mind, but I think there were more).
2003
saw the introduction of a killer feature, the worksheet data List (which
has
blossomed in 2007 into the Table). All of these versions saw improved
stability over prior versions.

Excel 2007 made some step changes, some of which being big improvements,
some big disappointments. I try to like it, I've been using it in various
beta and even pre-beta forms since 2005. But the fact is, my productivity
greatly affects my satisfaction with a software package, and any negative
changes in a new version will strongly reduce my satisfaction.

But the ActiveX / VBA technology is now being considered outdated by
some
parts of Microsoft. Is Microsoft considering to redo Excel as .NET
calsses
(instead of ActiveX objects?)

They reassure us that VBA will remain a strong component of Excel for
several more versions (and look how long XLM has remained viable). I
think
rather than try to rewrite Excel from the ground floor, Microsoft will
probably rely on better implementation of the PIAs and expansion of VSTO.
I
have no special knowledge of their strategy, I am just responding based
on
what little I know and on what sense I make out of what I see.

- Jon
-------
Jon Peltier, Microsoft Excel MVP
Tutorials and Custom Solutions
Peltier Technical Services, Inc. - http://PeltierTech.com
_______