On 2005-01-02, Shorty <hankmacxxxk[at]usa.net> wrote:
- quote -

Over the Christmas break, I recently went through the exact same
evaluation.

- quote -

This was the reason that I kept with M04 instead of moving to Q05.
I like the fact that with Money, if I enter scheduled transactions,
they make it into my budget automatically. If I change a scheduled
transaction, the changes are reflected in my budget automatically.

In Quicken, I could figure no way to tell the budget that it should
use information from my scheduled transactions. The consequence
of this is that I had to maintain scheduled transactions in two
places - in the scheduled transactions screen and in the budget.

This was primary reason I didn't migrate to Quicken. It's more
important to me than the fact that one of my FI's isn't available
for download in Money.

- quote -

I found that the downloads in Quicken were dramatically slower than
the downloads in Money. Of course, I have 5 different financial
institutions, and about 30 total accounts, which might account for
the difference, because Quicken seems to have to redraw its download
dialog for every FI that you connect to.

Cheers,
- Mark

We're awfully busy trying to hold the line on what we have...

"Scott Thomson" <vps41[at]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ua0rZQT8EHA.2276[at]TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
- quote -

I used Money for 5 years and switched to Quicken this year after using M05
because as you know my file & prograzm combination was running so slow it
became unusable. In terms of functionality I can't see many different tools
in either program. Certainly not enough to make someone change programs
because of functionality. The gap has widened on user interface (M05 I think
becoming a bad web page) whilst quickens might seem cluttered to a first ime
user but after learning your way around the ability to go from anywhere to
anywhere , keeping views open in separate windows and report history (of
changes) being kept that can be reaccessed in that session does give more
flexibility. Category/Class flexibilty is extremely strong, Q05 can change
from calander year to financial year (july to june) reporting, Q05 does not
auto update thai baht a currency I had to add whereas Money did, Quickens
budget is fine, retirement planner fine, cash flow forecast works fine but
interface not as convenient as money (harder to view and change
accounts/cash flow scenarios)

I don't see anyone either for quicken or money crying for more functionality
indeed I dont think there really has been much more funcitonality for a few
years and most people find they can stay on earlier versions fine except for
downloading connectivity or the need to hear new music or see a new colour
on the screen. In terms of usability there is a big change and Quicken is
now in the lead in that race.

Another related note is that the Money newsgroup is far better than Quicken.
Money newsgroup gets you answers and discussions are more vigorous with more
people. But now I guess money newsgroup is mostly full of problems and
complaints related to poor software whereas quickens is not.


"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:OqgAZbP8EHA.2180[at]TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
- quote -

I have read through your comparisons and a lot of it will depend upon
which financial institution you are accessing. It is clear that a
direct access to a FI (whether it is Money or Quicken) is much faster
than going through the Yodlee update now function. Your discussions of
identifying the stock splits and dividends has been working for me in
Money 04 and 05 so I do not understand why you are having them only work
in Quicken and not Money.

I know that when MS and Yodlee get their connection working, that it
will perform the updates in the background and the user should the next
time the user starts Money it will be current. That however will require
the user to be satisfied with his Money file being stored on Money Central.

I agree with you that the "Update Now" is slow. I have switched to
running Money 05 in a similar mode to 04 and am happy with it. I have
turned off the passport usage so my file is not stored on MoneyCentral.
I then have only set up direct links to those FI that have Money direct
links. I then manually download from others, notably Bank of America.

Art

Scott Thomson wrote:

- quote -

Don't get me wrong. I'm not lobbying or asserting some superiority of M over
Q. Just trying to separate out what the differences are. At the moment, I'm
stuck at M04--and unless M06 takes a significant swerve in direction for the
product, will be for some time. So I'm trying more than usual to keep an eye
out for alternatives.

"Shorty" <hankmacxxxk[at]usa.net> wrote in message
news:wVVBd.4611$O66.4434[at]newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
- quote -

Dick Watson wrote:
- quote -

I want them to be the best.

Dick Watson wrote:
- quote -

I conclude that the only functional difference in how transactions are
categorized and classified is that you don't have to assign a category to a
category group in Quicken. I'm not disagreeing or agreeing that:

1) M downloads are slow
2) some FIs are supported for download in Q that are not supported in M
3) Q has some ability under some circumstance to recognize a schedule for a
dividend based on downloaded data.

"Shorty" <hankmacxxxk[at]usa.net> wrote in message
news:f3TBd.949$Vj3.587[at]newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
- quote -

I conclude no functional difference, you are just citing performance.

"Scott Thomson" <vps41[at]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OQzSo1J8EHA.3856[at]tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Dick Watson wrote:
- quote -

download my broker with Money. I can create a category name with out
assigning it to some group. Quicken also recognized the downloaded
dividend schedule (dividend from XYZ of $250 in Jan=Mar=Jun=Sept).
Maybe those things can be done in Money but I had not figured out how,

when you click on something in quicken its there before you can blink unlike
M2005 which can take up to 20 secs making it unusable. So as long as Quicken
can do everything you need or as much as M2005 it will be better on this
basis alone.


"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:Oq3PbZI8EHA.3260[at]TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
- quote -

How is this different from what Money can do?

"Shorty" <hankmacxxxk[at]usa.net> wrote in message
news:05IBd.831$Vj3.105[at]newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
- quote -

Using Money 2005 and Quicken 2005. I have been a Money user for years.
My goals in using the packages are to keep track of my checking
accounts, investment accounts and credit cards and to watch my budget.
I use my brokers free bill pay system and various outside services for
investment decisions. I have been frustrated for some time with Money
with their system for setting up and classifying categories and the
continued inability to download transaction from my local bank and one
of my investment brokers. I found the budget process very cumbersome.
So I decided to try Quicken starting on the 1st of the year.

The download took about 20 minutes on my DSL line. I was able to set up
and download my local checking account, all my credit cards and both
brokers in 4-5 hours. I had to make a few adjustments in my broker
accounts for positions that were created prior to the dates I was able
to download.
What I like about Quicken is the fast downloads of all my accounts, the
ability to set up classifications using the names I want and the budget
set up (so far). I do not like the screens as well as the ones in Money
2005.

It is too soon for me to tell if I will keep Quicken or not.