Live data from Hacker News

If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

support.microsoft.com

111–120 of 168 posts

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#111

This is a 11 year old knowledge base article for a bug in a product (Excel 97) that saw the light in 1997, that is 17 years ago. Yes, the second workaround is kind of hilarious, but let's not draw too many far-fetching conclusions from it. I believe many of us have seen crazier bugs.

>I believe many of us have seen crazier bugs. Might be, but is it a good sign for computer industry as a whole?

Let's rephrase my point: the existence of this knowledge base article should not be taken as a sign for ANYTHING. :)

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#112
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I make fun of java developers for over complicated solutions, I've never quite seen anything as over-engineered and byzantine as COM. I remember at my last job we had legacy COM objects that inherited from about 5-7 different templated objects, and that was... normal. COM is the worst. I actually like windows as a user, but I'm amazed that it won as much developer mindshare as it did considering how much t…

Similar to COM, are (beside OLE, DCOM, ActiveX) Gnome's "Bonobo" (component model) [1], KDE's KParts, Mozilla's XPCOM and CORBA. Apple choose KHTML over Gecko for it's Webkit fork [2] because of the various cons of such component models. [1] Bonobo is officially deprecated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo_(component_model) [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XPCOM

I remain convinced that C++ warps peoples minds into things like this :-). I'll go out on a limb and say that pretty much ALL of those things are horrible.

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#113
post #72
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years ago I had to look at two Excel spreadsheets fullscreen side by side each open in their own window (two monitor setup) and this was...not easy!!! I eventually found some hack online to open up multiple instances of Excel at once. Still was bizarre that is a simple use.

Agreed that it's dumb behaviour, but it's not exactly a complicated hack - just run excel again (from start menu, from win+R, etc.) and it creates a new instance.

You think I didn't try that?

IIRC opening up Excel again from the start menu didn't create a new instance, it just gave focus to the document/instance I had open. My jaw kinda dropped cause it wasn't like I had an extremely uncommon use case. There was no File > Open new window. I tried dragging the document to outside, like you can do in Firefox with a tab, nope. Opening a new document simply opened it in the current instance I had running. I needed to do a compare side by side of the documents. Switching between them didn't cut it.

Btw this is a different problem with Excel and Office all together - I was using Excel 2007 because the files I was using were created in 2007 and used a customer (who had only 2007) and would mess up if you saved them in a later version. The files had some complicated macros in them. Compatibility Mode (I think that's what they called it) WAS NOT actually compatible!! 2010 was out, and I had that installed as well, but 2007 had to be the one I used for this task.

I was just doing some simple maintenance operations on them. I had nothing to do with their evil creation.

There was some way to eventually get Excel 2007 to run two instances of itself, but like I said, it was a hack that I found online after a bunch of searching.

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#114
post #113
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed that it's dumb behaviour, but it's not exactly a complicated hack - just run excel again (from start menu, from win+R, etc.) and it creates a new instance.

You think I didn't try that? IIRC opening up Excel again from the start menu didn't create a new instance, it just gave focus to the document/instance I had open. My jaw kinda dropped cause it wasn't like I had an extremely uncommon use case. There was no File > Open new window. I tried dragging the document to outside, like you can do in Firefox with a tab, nope. Opening a new document simply opened it in the curren…

I may well be wrong about historical behaviour, but for at least a few years now (i.e. within my memory) it's been the case - but you need to create a new instance, not just a new document. I.e. if you open a specific file, or do anything to start a new document from within excel, it will keep the same instance.

It's still ridiculous behaviour, and drives me crazy because on a typical day I'll have a minimum of 3 spreadsheets open (3 sheets I always need quick access to) and often 10-20, and it can be a real pain in the ass remembering which sheets are in which instance, leading to regularly needing to close a sheet, start a new excel instance, then re-open the sheet in that, whenever I want to look at it side by side to another sheet. And even more annoying, if I'm opening a sheet that's an email attachment, I can't just open direct from Outlook, I have to save it locally so I can make sure to open it in the correct instance.

There's also this weird thing about how it thinks you want to shut down spreadsheets. I always forget which way is which, but sometimes it thinks you want to shut just the active sheet, sometimes it thinks every sheet you have open (in that excel instance). Just checked here and it doesn't seem to be the case on my home PC (Office Professional Plus 2010), but it definitely does on my work laptop. I think it's different behaviour between the X in the top right, double clicking the top left logo, and using alt+F4, I just can't remember which is which. But any logic would say that if you're showing multiple windows on the task bar, telling one to close doesn't mean close the others, and I think this is essentially tied to the same issue with trying to view sheets side by side.

I've never had issues with Word as others mentioned, though - possibly due to luck with versions I've used, or maybe I just don't have to compare two word documents side by side as often as I do with spreadsheets.

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#115
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

COM hates MTA threading, most of the Office object model actually insists on STA single-threads sitting in the main UI thread to even work (i.e. you cannot use BackgroundWorker() )! Some guy @ MS even released this byzantine code to deal with the situation ( http://blogs.msdn.com/b/andreww/archive/2008/11/19/implement... ) which unfortunately doesn't work. It's completely nuts how bad the object model is.

As much as I make fun of java developers for over complicated solutions, I've never quite seen anything as over-engineered and byzantine as COM. I remember at my last job we had legacy COM objects that inherited from about 5-7 different templated objects, and that was... normal. COM is the worst. I actually like windows as a user, but I'm amazed that it won as much developer mindshare as it did considering how much t…

COM doesnt mandate anything silly like that.

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#116

Whenever I am waiting for something to happen, I tend to move my mouse pointer around in circles on the screen - this always caught peoples attention and I've been asked plenty of times over the years if there was a reason for it. I always joked that it helped make things go faster by making the computer know I was still there and waiting - I guess I wasn't lying.

If I see a wall of text, I highlight it as I read through it. People think that's really odd too!

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#117
post #59
post #53

Excel codebase is very old, most is still in recent versions. Excel 2010 still relies on WinAPI's Fibers [1] (lightweight threads). In recent years the idea got popular again with Lua's co-routines and GO's goroutines. So it is manually scheduled by the application, instead of relying on the OS. In 2014, there is a lot of code in Excel that dates back to Excel 3 (1990). Excel 2010 still relied on the outdated MDI con…

A few years ago I had to look at two Excel spreadsheets fullscreen side by side each open in their own window (two monitor setup) and this was...not easy!!! I eventually found some hack online to open up multiple instances of Excel at once. Still was bizarre that is a simple use.

For Excel 2007 (on Win8.1) you 'just' middle click (wheel-click) on Excel if it is pinned to the task bar (which is how I happen to have things set up -- same thing as opening two instances as mentioned elsewhere). I agree, not very obvious, but I think multi-mon puts you in the 'top' 5%* (so you won't get as much help from a scenario point of view).

*can't find a reference for that, so I may be off.

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#118

Whenever I am waiting for something to happen, I tend to move my mouse pointer around in circles on the screen - this always caught peoples attention and I've been asked plenty of times over the years if there was a reason for it. I always joked that it helped make things go faster by making the computer know I was still there and waiting - I guess I wasn't lying.

Whenever I encounter a spinning progress indicator, I try to spin my mouse in sync with it.

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#119
How random workarounds are reminds of a joke that made the rounds on the internet more than a decade ago: "If Cars Were Built Like Computers" and the best line is:

> Occasionally for no reason whatsoever, you car would lock the door and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key, and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.

Re: If you move your mouse continually the query may not fail. Do not stop moving

#120
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

COM hates MTA threading, most of the Office object model actually insists on STA single-threads sitting in the main UI thread to even work (i.e. you cannot use BackgroundWorker() )! Some guy @ MS even released this byzantine code to deal with the situation ( http://blogs.msdn.com/b/andreww/archive/2008/11/19/implement... ) which unfortunately doesn't work. It's completely nuts how bad the object model is.

As much as I make fun of java developers for over complicated solutions, I've never quite seen anything as over-engineered and byzantine as COM. I remember at my last job we had legacy COM objects that inherited from about 5-7 different templated objects, and that was... normal. COM is the worst. I actually like windows as a user, but I'm amazed that it won as much developer mindshare as it did considering how much t…

I think the core of COM is sound (pure interfaces, QI, refcounting, IDL).

I think the ugliness is due to threading issues and being welded on to Win32 message pumps. If you have a dedicated COM thread/pool you'll mostly be fine (security stuff can still get complicated). But on the other hand if you start doing COM things on a thread you own where you share control of the message pumping, you open yourself to a world of mental anguish.

Post reply on HN