MicrosoftI meant in general.
Take the convention set as simply VM + <number>:
(i) With padding: VM001, VM002, VM003, ..., VM036, VM037, ..., VM571, ..., VM622, ...
(ii) No padding: VM1, VM2, VM3, ..., VM36, VM37, ..., VM571, ..., VM622, ...
Now, in Excel if you want to split the number part it is quite easier for (i) (simply =RIGHT(x, 3)) compared to how you would do it for the case in (ii). Fixed length of each component helps here. But without padding (hence no fixed-length components), with more complex constructs, e.g. when two components that only contain numbers are concatenated, it may become impossible to derive components.
And, in lists and reports padded numbers will look better and easier to perceive the components within the concatenated text.
I agree, mostly for human interpretation, but yet humans do look at these and we often use concatenation of multiple components when coming up with names. And for non-humans, I guess they do not care anyway :-)
And, I believe this may be deemed as just a matter of personal liking.
