Hello Dick:
You wrote in conference microsoft.public.money on Mon, 13 Sep 2004
18:27:51 -0600:

DW> One other thing that sounds cool (I've been doing it in Excel with
DW> Money Link data): With the new Spending Average, people can view a
DW> monthly dollar average for spending per category based on past account
DW> data.

Hmm... I don't see it anywhere. Perhaps in Essential Budget? Help does not
mention it either - all occurences of the word "average" pertain to the
stock analysis.

Vadim

One other thing that sounds cool (I've been doing it in Excel with Money
Link data): With the new Spending Average, people can view a monthly dollar
average for spending per category based on past account data.

"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:OUUOP4amEHA.3876[at]TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
....
- quote -

Thank you for posting back. I was hoping you would as it was pretty obvious
you had direct knowledge of M05. (Though I note elsewhere that the
"announcement" may not have happened today. I hope you didn't commit an NDA
no-no by posting.)

I have not touched any M05 yet, so I speak only from inputs like yours and
the reviews (useless though they may be) and the materials Microsoft has
posted.

I do not know exactly what "essential" mode means vs. "advanced". I share
your feeling that Microsoft would prefer to dumb the product down rather
than making the features for those select few in the "clueful user" crowd
work better or more comprehensive. This is not a new initiative and I'm not
yet convinced that M05 is more than one more incremental step in that
direction. I also agree that putting the switch in Tools|Options means many
users will never find it. (But I'd rather they put it there than in ten
places on every screen like Make Recurring and Use Transaction Forms.)

Your assumption that the customer base using Advanced mode will decline
assumes either a) that Advanced mode users quit using or b) that market
penetration for the product increases--i.e., more people use Money over
time. I bet Microsoft is hoping the latter will occur--and has been for
quite a long time. I'm not convinced this will occur. I believe that there
are basically two classes of users that are pretty immutable: core users who
keep using it and new users who think it sounds amusing, open it up,
discover that Money won't make them rich automagically and won't do much of
anything without at least some of their involvement (this is what the change
we are discussing here is trying to reduce) and punt the whole thing.

As to the online account kaka, I'm not too worried about it for my case as
Money only knows some of my accounts are at FIs that support this stuff.
I've never set ANY of it up and don't intend to start now. (The whole
curmudgeon thing.) But I agree, based on what you write, that this will
probably cause more problems than it solves for existing users who wanted to
do things their way. Time will tell if this is as big a problem as you are
predicting. I hope not. That's be a lot of posts to read here where I really
couldn't help much. It'd be like the instant epay thing in M02 all over
again. (In more ways than one: that was another "feature" tailored to the
lowest-common-denominator user that hosed lots of others.)

re. "the product Microsoft Money, as we knew it, is effectively killed by
this version", time will tell. Let's hope not. I think Microsoft would like
to kill the current paradigm--replacing it with a running infomercial where
they can charge a service fee for us to see whatever information our banks
let them show us and vector us to insurance providers, loan companies,
credit card companies, and so forth in exchange for a piece of the action.
The current paradigm generates support costs. The new paradigm would
generate a revenue stream.

I've made no move on M05 yet for several reasons--1) their obfuscation/my
confusion over differences between Standard and Deluxe (I'm so cheap that I
don't want to spend the extra $20 for features I uniformly do no care
about), 2) long memory for M98 chills me when reading Microsoft
pronouncements that this is the largest rewrite in the history of the
product. M98 was another quantum rewrite and it was the only version since
v. 2 I've ever outright skipped. It sucked.

I also fear the same things you fear about the direction of the product.
(But I have for years and my fears are only very slowly being realized.) All
of the information so far suggests that the ONLY change for advanced users
who don't do the Money+Ebanking thing is where you enter a stock split. I'd
like to think they fixed things like the tax estimator screen and the
scheduled paycheck morph. I'm skeptical.

<VENTINGI'm also peeved about their eliminating the option for split category lists.
I put transactions in with the keyboard. Replacing [Tab] with [Shift+;] for
subcategory/classification entry REALLY PAINS ME. And it's worse than that:
I will end up reentering classification information several times a week or
using the pull downs in order to change subclass. (E.g., transaction
autocompletes for classification Automobile:CR-V, the last classification in
a transaction it finds when I enter the [D I Tab] (Diamond Shamrock) payee.
It should be Automobile:TL since that's what I just filled up. With M04, I
[Tab] to CR-V, hit a [T] and then [Enter]. With M05 I will have to tab to
Automobile:CR-V, and hit [A U shift+; T]. A decade of muscle memory for two
keys replaced now with four for absolutely no good reason.) I haven't even
used M05 yet and that ALREADY makes me angry.
</VENTING
"Vadim Rapp" <vrapp[at]nospam.polyscience.com> wrote in message
news:epksfDamEHA.1152[at]TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Hello Dick:
You wrote on Tue, 7 Sep 2004 18:24:12 -0600:

DW> Are you speculating re. "adware product with all features stripped down
DW> to 'essentials'"?
DW> Are you speculating re. "existing users of Money should expect a very
DW> big surprise from Money 2005"?
DW> Are you speculating re. "percentage of those who will be able to
DW> migrate - 5% or whopping 10%"?

OK, now when it's released...

1. The "essential" mode is the default one. In the new file, all accounts,
budget, bills, etc. - are essential.

The choice advanced/essential is not in the register page, as one might
expect. It's in Options. There's no hint on the register page like "you
might want to switch to the advanced view here".

All this means that 99% of the new users won't even know about the advanced
view, since 99% of the users never open any Options/settings.

Which means that the customer base of the advanced view will rapidly shrink.

Which means that in the new versions Microsoft will be increasingly
reluctant to work on anything beyond the "essential" view; "advanced" mode
will be accumulating unaddressed bugs; sooner or later it will be dropped -
and for a good reason - almost nobody will be using it or even know about
it.


2. In Money 2005 the mode of linking an account to the online services was
significantly changed. Previously, account was primary. Now online bank is
primary. Once you connect to the bank, Money downloads all your accounts it
finds there. You don't have any control. You can't delete them either - if
you try to delete one account, Money says it would delete all accounts
belonging to the same online bank (i.e. it can delete an online bank, but
not individual accounts within online bank, because the bank is primary and
it tells that the account exists). You can't match them to existing accounts
either - Money 2005 has new function "merge duplicate accounts", but you can
only merge accounts within the same online bank.

This creates a host of pat scenarios. For instance, the one I have: with my
wife we have a joint account, and also each of us has an individual
account - all with Bank One. Consequently, 2 login id's in Money. Money 2005
downloads the joint account on each login, and there's absolutely nothing
you can do to avoid having two duplicate accounts with duplicate
transactions in them, resulting in obvious budget etc. consequences. Even if
I close one account, Money still downloads new transactions into it. I even
opened a support incident with Microsoft Support, and it was even already
escalated, but it appears that their Far-East support center was not trained
yet for Money 2005, so their responses are, uhm, not very professional.

I think that the host of problems created by the new scheme of online
banking in Money 2005 will make transition of the old users incredibly
complex and frustrating. I may be wrong, but I think that only a small
fraction of them will be able to overcome them, especially with the "help"
from the untrained Support.

Now, if you combine (1) and (2), it's easy to see the conclusion: the
product Microsoft Money, as we knew it, is effectively killed by this
version.

Time will show if I'm right or wrong.

I would be interested to hear your opinion, once you try Money 2005.


regards,

Vadim

But I've got to tell you: I'm almost done reading the user entries in the
blog and there is some really whacko stuff in there. AOLs host machines are
10 million times more secure than my Windows client?!? Just go carve up
something like Money in Access and you can make data entry easier? GnuCash
is update continually? Money doesn't allow you to alter the sign of a split
entry? YMMV.

An intersting companion thread largely from the same parallel universe where
we all code our own apps and Linux does everything we need to do with less
hassle than Windows: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/03/033249

I think we are in agreement re. what's coming in M05.

I had not read that blog before but it sounds very familiar. I'm just
watching from the outside and figured some of this out:
http://umpmfaq.info/faqdb.php?q=66 and http://umpmfaq.info/faqdb.php?q=43
are examples. Not to mention LOTS of posts.

I, too, am still looking for any beef to justify all of these claims that
this is the most substantial Money upgrade ever. Oh, and I'm a do-it-myself
curmudgeon for whom all of the MSN banking support in the world is pretty
meaningless.

"Vadim Rapp" <vrapp[at]nospam.polyscience.com> wrote in message
news:Ok6aLHelEHA.644[at]tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
- quote -

??> > sorry, I did not get, who promised more features for power users???

DW> See the documents at
DW> http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/c...-materials.asp. Read
what
DW> they promise for Greg in the Reviewers Guide.

I looked at it, but did not find anything _new_ promised for Greg.
Everything presented as "advanced", perhaps with the exception of popup
stock alerts (hope to make daytraders using Money?), are already existing
features - only in the previous versions they were not "advanced" but
"standard", i.e. the only available. I think it's clever marketing on MS
part if they create a feeling that these features have improved somehow. I
especially liked the multiple "enhanced" in the Fact Sheet. Enhanced
compared to what? One might think "to the previous version", and be wrong.
To the dumbed-down Trisha is much closer.

I think the real enhancements might start from pretty obvious things. I'm
sure you know that, for instance, if payee deposits the monthly check
several days into the next month, Money shows zero spending in the previous
month and double spending in the next one (yes I know the option, but then
you in fact don't track the real payment). This makes Budget and monthly
reports wrong at about 80%. Another similar "feature" is that if in Planner
you plan $300 expense on insurance every six months, Money assumes that it's
$50 every month; and when you pay the premium for 6 months in one check, you
get 5 under- and one 6-times-over alert. IMHO, working on this shame alone
would be far more valuable for the product that all the "enhancements".
Plus, I'm sure, as a regular in this newsgroup, you can name 20 other issues
on the top of your head that users were requesting for years and versions,
to no avail - and I don't think "more MSN" would be among them.

Did you read "Show me the money" blog at
http://blogs.msdn.com/philipsu/archi...01/170682.aspx ? I'm
completely agreed with the feedback posted by "groc".

There's, however, one real serious enhancement in Money 2005: Money 2004
worked only with the banks that were supporting Money. Money 2005 works
through MSN with much, much more banks, including those that don't support
Money.


regards,

Vadim

Comments inline.

"Vadim Rapp" <vrapp[at]nospam.polyscience.com> wrote in message
news:exOhBHclEHA.2864[at]TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
- quote -

See the documents at
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/c...-materials.asp. Read what
they promise for Greg in the Reviewers Guide.

- quote -

They just enable the user to hide the functionality. I won't hide it. If
someone wants to hide it, more power to them. If I can't get at the
functionality, than I'll call it removed.

- quote -

I think many of them would gladly pay more to dumb it down a whole lot
further. Sad. But true.

Hello Dick:
You wrote on Wed, 8 Sep 2004 06:28:38 -0600:

DW> I just hope they deliver what the pap promises: more features for power
DW> users.

sorry, I did not get, who promised more features for power users???

DW> I think the "essential" interface is a new thing that makes it possible
DW> to hide features rather than actually removing them.

Well, if you hide certain functionality, then you don't use it. For example,
if you hide deposits and leave only withdrawals, is it hide or remove?

DW> This may be what has been referred to previously (by myself among
DW> others) as the Tools|> Options|Clueless User mode.

I agree. My point is, will the clueless user pay the full "premium" price
for the "advanced" features that he is not going to use?


Vadim

Thanks for the answer.

Well, the MSN ads and linkages have been creeping in for quite some time.
I'm not sure M05 will be much worse, but it sounds like it will have lots
more ability to vector you with all of its shopping center stuff. (It has a
more politically correct name, but that's sure what it sounds like.)

I think the "essential" interface is a new thing that makes it possible to
hide features rather than actually removing them. This may be what has been
referred to previously (by myself among others) as the
Tools|Options|Clueless User mode. I'm not opposed to it. But I'm a whole lot
more (infinitely?) like "Greg" than "Trisha" in the Microsoft scenario. (I
look more like him, too.) I just hope they deliver what the pap promises:
more features for power users. I'm still skeptical.

"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]myrealbox.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:eD8gz6VlEHA.3824[at]TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Hello Dick:
You wrote in conference microsoft.public.money on Tue, 7 Sep 2004
18:24:12 -0600:

DW> Are you speculating re. "adware product with all features stripped down
DW> to 'essentials'"?

DW> Are you speculating re. "existing users of Money should expect a very
DW> big surprise from Money 2005"?

DW> Are you speculating re. "percentage of those who will be able to
DW> migrate - 5% or whopping 10%"?

Well, here's before-the-release answer.

re. adware product: already Money 2004 had some pages MSN-enabled, which
means that ads appeared in the product, and you couldn't use certain
features of the product without seeing ads. I think this qualifies the
product for adware, doesn't it? *

re. "strippped down to essentials": this is not to say that nothing is left
but the essentials. But, basing strictly on the PCMag article, it seems
somewhat not logical to buy for about $70 the option to have not _more_ but
_less_ features in the new essential interface, don't you think?

More after the release on 13th...


Vadim


*) to be certain, I looked up the definition of the adware in dictionary.com
, and found it. Alas, the author of the article thinks that adware =
spyware. Could it be the same PC Magazine author?!

Are you speculating re. "adware product with all features stripped down to
'essentials'"?

Are you speculating re. "existing users of Money should expect a very big
surprise from Money 2005"?

Are you speculating re. "percentage of those who will be able to migrate -
5% or whopping 10%"?

I have no first hand experience, no NDA experience, and only know what I've
read from MS and the reviewers. From this nothing leads me to conclude--or
doubt, for that matter--what you write. Past experience, however, would tend
to make me doubt it. So, I ask the above to calibrate your input. What is
your basis for these statements?

You are spot-on about the editorial dependence on vendor ads and the minimal
depth of the reviews/reviewer experience with the products.

"Vadim Rapp" <vr[at]myrealbox.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23uof8ZTlEHA.3632[at]TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Hello Jason:
You wrote in conference microsoft.public.money on Fri, 03 Sep 2004
15:02:41 -0500:

JB> PCMag did a review...find the link below:

JB> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1635779,00.asp

This review is a very good example of why one should never read a review
from the publications funded by the advertising from the vendors of reviewed
products.

I don't think the author spent with Microsoft Money more than 15 minutes of
his life.

I think existing users of Money should expect a very big surprise from Money
2005. I wonder what will be the percentage of those who will be able to
migrate - 5% or whopping 10%.

Though for the new users it may be OK. I doubt however who will want to pay
the same price for the de-facto adware product with all features stripped
down to "essentials". Probably housewives without a clue, looking for a good
gift - can't imagine anyone else.


Vadim

PCMag did a review...find the link below:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1635779,00.asp

bULUSU wrote:
- quote -

Try here http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/c...-materials.asp

--
Regards
Bob Peel,
Microsoft MVP - Money

For UK tips & fixes see
http://support.microsoft.com/default...d=fh;EN-GB;mny.
For wishes or suggestions see
http://register.microsoft.com/mswish/suggestion.asp
or for UK wishes http://www.microsoft.com/uk/support/money/feedback

"bULUSU" <anonymous[at]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:05af01c49174$f6e2d070$a401280a[at]phx.gbl...
- quote -

Where can I find info/spec on money 2005. Nothif to be
found on Microsoft web yet !!!!