Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Final Jeopardy : Trebeck: You know what, how about you just write down a number, any number at all. Could be a 1 or a 2, perhaps 3... and excel you answered; A smiley face emoji, simply stunning.

Excel is no longer motivated by the original intention of a spreadsheet, and now caters to the lowest common denominator, a piece of graph paper. As such MS has shifted focus from doing calculation to text and graphics layout tool. white text copied from a terminal : white text white background you got it! comma separated numbers : default a long string with commas in it want a plot : it is in the insert menu for some reason, since plots and numbers are no longer excels raison d'être



The date parsing being discussed has been the behavior for at least 20 years, probably more like 30.

Your comment about graph paper echoes a comment from a former Excel PM: "The gridlines are the most important feature of Excel, not recalc."

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2012/01/06/how-trello-is-diff...


Nice, well there you go.


MSFT did the same thing with Project when they introduced something called "Manually Scheduled Tasks."

Project is fundamentally a critical path scheduling tool, or at least was. Task A must finish before Task B, which must complete before Task C. If A is delayed, then that delay pushes B and C out, too.

This is what it's FOR, more or less.

Manually scheduled tasks don't move. They're set with whatever dates you give them, and do not move in response to delays or whatnot from predecessor tasks.

People wanted this because some (dumb) people insisted that "well, that task CANT move because it has to be done by then!"

This is akin to asking for the arithmetic engine to be turned off in Excel, because by golly you really need 2 and 2 to sum to 17.5.


> People wanted this because some (dumb) people insisted that "well, that task CANT move because it has to be done by then!"

So? There are tasks like this that simply CANT move, why should a project management tool not have the ability to model that? If you don't like the feature you don't have to use it.

I get that you wouldn't want these fixed dates and if you can just plan and execute your project by yourself, but that is not always the case.

As an example: I had a project where it was really important for us to inspect the Aircraft Type (A321) into which we wanted to install our hardware and software. We where given an opportunity to do so by an airline during the maintenance of one of their A321. This was a fixed date. If we didn't finish our preparations before that maintenance date then we simply would not get this opportunity (or at the very least would have to wait a very very long time for the next opportunity). The Aircraft would simply not wait for us.

Not every task can move and just because you think they should does not make it so. Maybe there is more to Microsoft Project than just YOUR use-case?


This is such a "peak HN" kind of response.

I've been working with scheduling and project management tools for 20 years -- not just MS Project (widely regarded as the idiot cousin of the market, honestly) but also things like Primavera.

There's no reason to have a "manual" task in a scheduling tool.

First, if you have a task that can't move, you set it with a deadline and watch your deadline (as well as watching to see if the task moves PAST the deadline). Cementing the task in place doesn't help you; in fact, it actively HURTS you because it hides the fact that your forecast path isn't valid anymore.

Second, these tools ALSO include the idea of constraints. Scheduling tools include the idea of constraints which limit the critical path motion according to specific rules (based on the type of constraint in play).

Using ANY constraint, though, is frowned upon in serious scheduling circles precisely BECAUSE they distort the predictive ability of a critical path schedule. If Task C has a hard deadline of 1 Sept, then you watch you critical path to see if that remains possible. As tasks slip, you stay on top of the chain of tasks to seek opportunities to streamline or reduce scope ahead of critical task so that the deadline can be met.

(Guess what? It's not always possible.)

And you do this because you SEE that the schedule shows Task C moving to the right.

If you lock the task in place, odds are you won't notice that your critical path is collapsing.

The tl;dr is that cementing a task in place in a critical path schedule is not a good way to model deadlines. This is something any competent scheduler will tell you. It's part of the PMBOK, it's built into DoD scheduling guidelines, etc.

>Maybe there is more to Microsoft Project than just YOUR use-case?

Hilarious. I will say it's clear one of us doesn't quite understand the problem domain as well as they might represent, but given my background I know it's not me.


This feels more "peak HN" than the previous poster as it's dripping with self-importance and condescension.


Or, you know, actual knowledge about the problem domain. But you do you.


Project scheduling on works badly if you have resources 100% dedicated to a project. Trying to acurately forcast with partial resource is an exercise in madness.


On the very large programs I'm typically involved in, it's unusual to have a perfect resource pool like you describe. It's MORE likely that the whole thing is scheduled with job codes, and the labor pool is treated as elastic with additional people brought on as needed to fill roles as Electrical Engineer II or whatever.

Generally speaking, you can schedule just fine with partial resources as long as your project doesn't need more of a given resource at any given time than can be allocated to it. Really big construction projects and really big government (defense) contracts work like this.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: