I've noticed an extremely frustrating, not to mention misleading, aspect of
Excel 2K. If you have a column chart with a series whose values are all
considerably greater than zero, the "autoscale" feature will by default cut
off the floor of the graph at some value greater than zero. Charting
textbooks abound with comments as to how this is a very misleading style,
because it tends to exaggerate differences between points which might
actually be relatively quite small. Someone who's not looking at the chart
with a sharp eye might conclude that 2 points differed significantly when
in fact they were pretty close.

I was able to change the chart to zero-origin, but the process was fairly
long and in any case it's irritating to have to do this on every chart. Is
there a way to set options or registry settings such that it will always
default to zero-axis for any column (or similar type) chart regardless of
data values (the one exception, of course, being if you were plotting on a
log scale)? I'd like to do that and solve the problem once and for all.

In a larger context, how could Microsoft think their approach was an
intelligent default? Given that the literature emphasizes the enormous
risks with non-zero-origin charting, and how easy it is for such charts to
be badly misleading, what thought process led Microsoft to do it anyway?
It's especially bad in view of the apparent fact that trying to change this
is pretty obscure and many people might not figure it out (or indeed even
notice in the first place). So people might being end up misled by their
own charts, not to mention inadvertently misleading others - or certainly
ending up in frustration when the way their charts turn out isn't how
they'd like them to display.

Meanwhile, for myself it's also clear to me that in addition to Excel I
need a heavier-duty charting package as well. I routinely need to make true
3-D surface plots, and I'd also like to be able to plot a range of standard
functions, do complex curve fits, do charts with real and imaginary axes,
using various coordinate systems (e.g. cartesian, polar, hyperbolic, etc).
and in general get the power of full mathematical analysis. However - and
this is the key point - I need to be able to do this *without* having to
write out or calculate equations manually. Programs like Matlab are very
competent with mathematical calculations and graphing, but for simple
situations the setup time makes it not worth the effort. There are times
when I want to do that, and for these applications Matlab is a good tool,
but for times when I need to pound out a quick chart it's just a lot of
work. Does anybody have recommendations for good charting packages for the
type of activities I'm describing?

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

Alex -

I've noticed an extremely frustrating, not to mention misleading, aspect
of
Excel 2K. If you have a column chart with a series whose values are all
considerably greater than zero, the "autoscale" feature will by default
cut
off the floor of the graph at some value greater than zero. Charting
textbooks abound with comments as to how this is a very misleading style,
because it tends to exaggerate differences between points which might
actually be relatively quite small. Someone who's not looking at the chart
with a sharp eye might conclude that 2 points differed significantly when
in fact they were pretty close.

I was able to change the chart to zero-origin, but the process was fairly
long and in any case it's irritating to have to do this on every chart. Is

Double click the axis, set minimum scale to 0. Select the same axis of the
next chart, press F4. Etc.

there a way to set options or registry settings such that it will always
default to zero-axis for any column (or similar type) chart regardless of
data values (the one exception, of course, being if you were plotting on a
log scale)? I'd like to do that and solve the problem once and for all.

You could set up a user-defined chart type, and even set it as your default
chart type:

http://peltiertech.com/Excel/ChartsH...stomTypes.html

In a larger context, how could Microsoft think their approach was an
intelligent default?

How long have you been using Microsoft products? The defaults are usually
about the worst possible choice.

Given that the literature emphasizes the enormous
risks with non-zero-origin charting, and how easy it is for such charts to
be badly misleading, what thought process led Microsoft to do it anyway?

Where does the 4000-lb elephant sit? Wherever it wants.

It's especially bad in view of the apparent fact that trying to change
this
is pretty obscure and many people might not figure it out (or indeed even
notice in the first place). So people might being end up misled by their
own charts, not to mention inadvertently misleading others - or certainly
ending up in frustration when the way their charts turn out isn't how
they'd like them to display.

Meanwhile, for myself it's also clear to me that in addition to Excel I
need a heavier-duty charting package as well. I routinely need to make
true
3-D surface plots, and I'd also like to be able to plot a range of
standard
functions, do complex curve fits, do charts with real and imaginary axes,
using various coordinate systems (e.g. cartesian, polar, hyperbolic, etc).
and in general get the power of full mathematical analysis. However - and
this is the key point - I need to be able to do this *without* having to
write out or calculate equations manually. Programs like Matlab are very
competent with mathematical calculations and graphing, but for simple
situations the setup time makes it not worth the effort. There are times
when I want to do that, and for these applications Matlab is a good tool,
but for times when I need to pound out a quick chart it's just a lot of
work. Does anybody have recommendations for good charting packages for the
type of activities I'm describing?

I haven't used anything besides Excel for at least 12 years (well, Minitab,
but I hated it and pasted Minitab calculations into Excel for charting), and
that includes some heavy duty scientific charting. I've had to do my own
worksheet calculations, and sometimes use a simpler chart type than I might
have planned.

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

at Wed, 24 May 2006 04:19:55 GMT in
,
(Jon Peltier) wrote :

Alex -

I've noticed an extremely frustrating, not to mention misleading,
aspect of
Excel 2K. If you have a column chart with a series whose values are
all considerably greater than zero, the "autoscale" feature will by
default cut
off the floor of the graph at some value greater than zero...

I was able to change the chart to zero-origin, but the process was
fairly long and in any case it's irritating to have to do this on
every chart. Is

Double click the axis, set minimum scale to 0. Select the same axis of
the next chart, press F4. Etc.

there a way to set options or registry settings such that it will
always default to zero-axis for any column (or similar type) chart
regardless of data values (the one exception, of course, being if you
were plotting on a log scale)? I'd like to do that and solve the
problem once and for all.

You could set up a user-defined chart type, and even set it as your
default chart type:

http://peltiertech.com/Excel/ChartsH...stomTypes.html

Good idea. In fact, I think I'll set up all my own chart types, with more
rational defaults throughout.

In a larger context, how could Microsoft think their approach was an
intelligent default?

How long have you been using Microsoft products? The defaults are
usually about the worst possible choice.

For a LONG time...

Yeah, oftentimes the defaults are poor choices, but that doesn't mean IMHO
that one should adopt a resigned attitude that takes such folly as
acceptable. Part of my reason for the long diatribe after the basic
question is: I assume at least *somebody* at Microsoft is reading these
posts, and there is a chance that these comments might filter back to the
programmers.

OTOH, if Microsoft has a "brick-wall" policy between customer service and
the S/W devs, they are doing themselves a major disservice and probably
somewhat reducing their market. Good product design of necessity requires
not just company-solicited feedback but also daily feedback from customers
using the product. Any company wishing to improve their sales should look
at the feedback of customers in the field and ask whether changes are
warranted in view of what people are saying.

Given that the literature emphasizes the enormous
risks with non-zero-origin charting, and how easy it is for such
charts to be badly misleading, what thought process led Microsoft to
do it anyway?

Where does the 4000-lb elephant sit? Wherever it wants.

However, just because you have a powerful industry position doesn't mean
you have any need to assert this status by deliberately choosing options
that counteract the common wisdom. Indeed, if one does such, it tends to
suggest a lack of confidence in one's own position of strength. I don't
really think Microsoft has anything to fear wrt to competitors sucking up
their market any time soon.

Enough ranting, though. I've got a workable solution in your tip and that's
what I actually came for.

Meanwhile, for myself it's also clear to me that in addition to Excel
I need a heavier-duty charting package as well. ...

I haven't used anything besides Excel for at least 12 years (well,
Minitab, but I hated it and pasted Minitab calculations into Excel for
charting), and that includes some heavy duty scientific charting. I've
had to do my own worksheet calculations, and sometimes use a simpler
chart type than I might have planned.

I've run into enough absolute limitations to know that for certain charting
apps Excel is never going to suffice. It isn't really designed to be a
full-fledged scientific plotting program and you're really trying to
stretch its capabilities to use it in that way. If, for example, you want
to create a complex-plane plot of the Laplace transform of an electronic
filter, it's just not an appropriate tool.

Thanks, in any case, for the solution to the immediate problem at hand.

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

Yeah, oftentimes the defaults are poor choices, but that doesn't mean IMHO
that one should adopt a resigned attitude that takes such folly as
acceptable. Part of my reason for the long diatribe after the basic
question is: I assume at least *somebody* at Microsoft is reading these
posts, and there is a chance that these comments might filter back to the
programmers.

OTOH, if Microsoft has a "brick-wall" policy between customer service and
the S/W devs, they are doing themselves a major disservice and probably
somewhat reducing their market. Good product design of necessity requires
not just company-solicited feedback but also daily feedback from customers
using the product. Any company wishing to improve their sales should look
at the feedback of customers in the field and ask whether changes are
warranted in view of what people are saying.

....

However, just because you have a powerful industry position doesn't mean
you have any need to assert this status by deliberately choosing options
that counteract the common wisdom. Indeed, if one does such, it tends to
suggest a lack of confidence in one's own position of strength. I don't
really think Microsoft has anything to fear wrt to competitors sucking up
their market any time soon.

As I posted elsewhere recently, I don't think the programmers at Microsoft
really use their own software in day to day activities, and they don't have
a true feel for how the users really use it and for what the users really
need/want. They have scads of usability data and such, but I think a lot of
that is self selected, meaning it's sent in by the people who don't know
it's there or how to turn it off. And I sometimes have alternative
explanations for observed trends.

I'm basically happy providing workarounds and embellishments so people get
what they want from the software on their boxes.

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