> On "Aloke Prasad" <aprasad123[at]columbus.rr.invalid> wrote:
> > No sane person (the target
> > audience for M2004) would be investing in 401K anyway.
> And as someone who has a 401K why not?

> I agree. It's a matter of whether or not you trust the relevant .exe file
> not to access something you feel comfortable with it contacting.
Remember,
> there is a difference between allowing a file internal to your computer to
> access a remote server and having a port open that you don't want open.
I
> certainly agree that an external firewall is a different creature
> altogether. For one thing, it sounds like you are sharing an Internet
> connection. I might be mistaken but that is indeed very different from
the
> situation at my end. In that case, my advice is to get the stock quote by
> surfing the web and then enter it manually--a slight inconvenience, if you
> think about it. Open network security is clearly crazy.
> Firewalls are a b___h and we both know it.
> "Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:O%23IDz1URDHA.1804[at]TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > I run an external firewall. No way to do this. In any case, I should
> > ***not*** have to open network security just to let Money download a
stock
> > quote. How absurd is that?
> > > "Douglas Pommering" <dpommering[at]comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:jKadndrEO-BUqZeiU-KYvA[at]comcast.com...
> > > Sure it can. Identify the .exe file that attempts to access the
> Internet
> > > and instruct the firewall to always permit it to do so. I will say in
> all
> > > fairness that this assumes one has Symantec's product (Norton 2003 in
my
> > > case, which I am used to)) and also admin access. The story might be
> > > different on a network where one is not the system admin and can't get
> the
> > > firewall configured to permit the particular .exe file to access the
net
> > for
> > > whatever reason or can't get his computer to be considered a "trusted
> > site".
>

> Since you mentioned a 'reg hack', what quote server is Windows Registry
> pointing to?
> My
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Investor\Sto ckQuotes\QuoteServerURL
> shows URL data of http://data.moneycentral.msn.com/Scripts/invisapi.dll/

> grc doesn't see squat. From a security point of view, that's a good thing.
> I've also used the tools at http://www.dslreports.com.
> I wonder if the protocol for quotes is slightly different in the UK?
> Whatever, quotes have never worked well for me here since the day I
> installed M03. At first it was just completely impossible. Then the reg
hack
> to point to the new servers was published and things got slightly better.
> I've been on several versions of firmware in the router since then. Still
no
> joy. Dialup works fine. Disabling the firewall and leaving all else in the
> router the same works fine. Enabling the firewall breaks them. I have no
> other problems with anything I try to do through the firewall using
anybody
> else's software.
> "Bob Peel, MVP" <Bob_Peel[at]kiandra.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:u69TiwdRDHA.3144[at]tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Dick, FWIW I have a shared DSL connection with a Netgear DG814 router
and
> I
> > am using ZoneAlarm Pro with out of the box settings. I have just checked
> and
> > my quotes are downloading just fine. Although I have been around
computers
> > for a while, Firewalls and routers are a complete black art so I haven't
> > "played". I have used the www.grc.com sites Shields Up to check my
> security
> > and apart from port 21 FTP being closed everything else is in stealth
> mode.
> > Might be worth having a look at grc.

> Yes, I'm sharing the DSL connection across all the machines here in the
> basement computer museum and the WiFi rovers about the rest of the house,
> besides.
> What I've been doing to get quotes is either a) dropping the firewall just
> long enough to get quotes--about 20 seconds or so, unlike the several
hours
> it takes to timeout if the firewall is up, or b) opening a dialup
connection
> just long enough to get the quotes. I've got a DSL pipe and a firewall and
> the best way I can get quotes for Money is reverting to dial up. Absurd, I
> say.
> "Douglas Pommering" <dpommering[at]comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:NuOdnT0NKdX_0paiU-KYgg[at]comcast.com...
> > I agree. It's a matter of whether or not you trust the relevant .exe
file
> > not to access something you feel comfortable with it contacting.
> Remember,
> > there is a difference between allowing a file internal to your computer
to
> > access a remote server and having a port open that you don't want open.
> I
> > certainly agree that an external firewall is a different creature
> > altogether. For one thing, it sounds like you are sharing an Internet
> > connection. I might be mistaken but that is indeed very different from
> the
> > situation at my end. In that case, my advice is to get the stock quote
by
> > surfing the web and then enter it manually--a slight inconvenience, if
you
> > think about it. Open network security is clearly crazy.
> > > Firewalls are a b___h and we both know it.

> I agree. It's a matter of whether or not you trust the relevant .exe file
> not to access something you feel comfortable with it contacting.
Remember,
> there is a difference between allowing a file internal to your computer to
> access a remote server and having a port open that you don't want open.
I
> certainly agree that an external firewall is a different creature
> altogether. For one thing, it sounds like you are sharing an Internet
> connection. I might be mistaken but that is indeed very different from
the
> situation at my end. In that case, my advice is to get the stock quote by
> surfing the web and then enter it manually--a slight inconvenience, if you
> think about it. Open network security is clearly crazy.
> Firewalls are a b___h and we both know it.

> Sure it can. Identify the .exe file that attempts to access the Internet
> and instruct the firewall to always permit it to do so. I will say in all
> fairness that this assumes one has Symantec's product (Norton 2003 in my
> case, which I am used to)) and also admin access. The story might be
> different on a network where one is not the system admin and can't get the
> firewall configured to permit the particular .exe file to access the net
for
> whatever reason or can't get his computer to be considered a "trusted
site".

> I hate to agree that M03 is the best release since M97 or M2K, but it may
> well be. That's not saying much for a product that can't reliably upgrade
> legacy files, can't get a quote through a firewall, and has a nasty habit
of
> mangling a scheduled split into a paycheck--to name just three of its
> interesting features.
> I'm really not sure we would be better off if Microsoft had acquired
Intuit.
> The competition is the only thing keeping the price down and keeping any
> pressure at all on Microsoft to improve the product. If Microsoft Quicken
> were the only player in the market, what would it be like? Given that
> Microsoft has let many acquired products stay pretty independent, do you
> really think the Quicken development team would have mimicked any Money
> design? And remember, they've been much more shameless in turning the
thing
> into a vehicle for advertising and promotion than even Microsoft.
> "SteveC" <sconklan[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:#RGBuXMRDHA.304[at]tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > The posting was good fun and I laughed. The best version and most
> reliable
> > was Money97. I never have quite gotten over the bloat with the
HTML-look
> > that Money acquired in 1998; however, I think that Money03 has been the
> best
> > version since 97. I think it is a shame that the Feds didn't allow
> > Microsoft to buy Quicken as I think the two together would have been
> great.

> I have to say that, FOR ME, Money 2003 has been the best version of Money
> since Money 99. I did switch to a new PC (1.6GHz Athelon, 512 Mb memory)
> shortly after installing Money 2003, but I haven't had a problem with
Money
> 2003, yet.
> However, I still agree that Money has gotten too bloated and has too many
> fluff features and I know that it does have problems that have never been
> addressed by MS, the Retirement Account Wizard being my number 1 issue. I
> guess I just don't use the features that have been causing some folks
> problems.
> I do have to say though, that you really need to get a sense of humor.
Just
> because it's been running great for you (and me) doesn't mean that others
> haven't had problems and that we shouldn't have some fun talking about
those
> problems. Poking fun helps deal with the frustration and, who knows,
maybe
> someone at MS will get the "hint" that there are actually problems with
> Money that need to be addressed. One can hope!!
> --
> Regards,
> Kevin Campbell
> "Douglas Pommering" <dpommering[at]comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ArWdnYRiooUOxZWiXTWJgQ[at]comcast.com...
> > > Ridiculous. I've got MS Money 2003 Deluxe and Business running like
> butter
> > on a machine with a 935MHz Pentium III CPU and only 512 MB of RAM. Get
> > this: I'm using Windows Me, not XP (which I would love to have). Yes,
it
> > does require more sophistication to use it since the software is clearly
> > getting "smarter" and more capable at a rapid rate.
> > > Yes, it is more demanding than previous versions of Money. But it
simply
> > doesn't require the kind of SERIOUS computer you're intimating it does
to
> > function properly and, while I appreciate tongue-in-cheek humor,
finances
> > are serious business and people on this newsgroup are asking for help
with
> > something important--not a comedian and not an anti-Microsoft diatribe
> > which is quite simply out of line.

> I have to say that, FOR ME, Money 2003 has been the best version of Money
> since Money 99. I did switch to a new PC (1.6GHz Athelon, 512 Mb memory)
> shortly after installing Money 2003, but I haven't had a problem with
Money
> 2003, yet.
> However, I still agree that Money has gotten too bloated and has too many
> fluff features and I know that it does have problems that have never been
> addressed by MS, the Retirement Account Wizard being my number 1 issue. I
> guess I just don't use the features that have been causing some folks
> problems.
> I do have to say though, that you really need to get a sense of humor.
Just
> because it's been running great for you (and me) doesn't mean that others
> haven't had problems and that we shouldn't have some fun talking about
those
> problems. Poking fun helps deal with the frustration and, who knows,
maybe
> someone at MS will get the "hint" that there are actually problems with
> Money that need to be addressed. One can hope!!
> --
> Regards,
> Kevin Campbell
> "Douglas Pommering" <dpommering[at]comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ArWdnYRiooUOxZWiXTWJgQ[at]comcast.com...
> > > Ridiculous. I've got MS Money 2003 Deluxe and Business running like
> butter
> > on a machine with a 935MHz Pentium III CPU and only 512 MB of RAM. Get
> > this: I'm using Windows Me, not XP (which I would love to have). Yes,
it
> > does require more sophistication to use it since the software is clearly
> > getting "smarter" and more capable at a rapid rate.
> > > Yes, it is more demanding than previous versions of Money. But it
simply
> > doesn't require the kind of SERIOUS computer you're intimating it does
to
> > function properly and, while I appreciate tongue-in-cheek humor,
finances
> > are serious business and people on this newsgroup are asking for help
with
> > something important--not a comedian and not an anti-Microsoft diatribe
> > which is quite simply out of line.

> Ridiculous. I've got MS Money 2003 Deluxe and Business running like
butter
> on a machine with a 935MHz Pentium III CPU and only 512 MB of RAM. Get
> this: I'm using Windows Me, not XP (which I would love to have). Yes, it
> does require more sophistication to use it since the software is clearly
> getting "smarter" and more capable at a rapid rate.
> Yes, it is more demanding than previous versions of Money. But it simply
> doesn't require the kind of SERIOUS computer you're intimating it does to
> function properly and, while I appreciate tongue-in-cheek humor, finances
> are serious business and people on this newsgroup are asking for help with
> something important--not a comedian and not an anti-Microsoft diatribe
> which is quite simply out of line.

> Yes, it is more demanding than previous versions of Money. But it simply
> doesn't require the kind of SERIOUS computer you're intimating it does to
> function properly and, while I appreciate tongue-in-cheek humor, finances
> are serious business and people on this newsgroup are asking for help with
> something important--not a comedian and not an anti-Microsoft diatribe
> which is quite simply out of line.
Let me put it this way. I've been using Money for many

> Ridiculous. I've got MS Money 2003 Deluxe and Business running like
butter
> on a machine with a 935MHz Pentium III CPU and only 512 MB of RAM. Get
> this: I'm using Windows Me, not XP (which I would love to have). Yes, it
> does require more sophistication to use it since the software is clearly
> getting "smarter" and more capable at a rapid rate.
> Yes, it is more demanding than previous versions of Money. But it simply
> doesn't require the kind of SERIOUS computer you're intimating it does to
> function properly and, while I appreciate tongue-in-cheek humor, finances
> are serious business and people on this newsgroup are asking for help with
> something important--not a comedian and not an anti-Microsoft diatribe
> which is quite simply out of line.
> "$2K3 User" <noemail[at]noemail.com> wrote in message
> news:ylONa.47583$Xm3.11949[at]sccrnsc02...
> > We've been talking about it for weeks. I can't wait!! And since no one
> can
> > talk about because of the NDA - I've decided to break the NDA!!
> > > (tongue firmly planted in cheek)
> > > 2004 promises to bring:
> > > * Disappearing Payees just like in 2003 version! Yes, right before your
> > eyes your Payees that you've used for years auto-magically disappear.
> > > * Barely able to run on a GHz machine! Just like recent Money versions
> > we've always knew you loved the fact that this is one bloated piece of
> > software.
> > > * Memory Eater Feature! You didn't think we'd actually lose this great
> > feature. We'll use as much memory as possible for Money Express - even
> > though it doesn't need it!
> > > * Moneycentral Non-Synchronization! That's right, we don't want MSFT
> > software to communicate properly to other MSFT features! Who wants
that?!
> > > > - and there's even more features not included! -
> > > * Stock Options - NOT! - seriously who has these now after the dot com
> bust?
> > You don't need to be able to work with Stock Options in Money - use
Excel
> > instead!
> > > * Cash Flow is still just like 2003! Yep, we really wanted to mess with
> > what people found functional in previous versions of Money so why ruin a
> > good thing!
> > > *NEW BUGS! That's right!! NEW bugs!! Who would be happy if we didn't
> > introduce NEW bugs with the OLD bugs we've left in from Money 2003 and
> other
> > previous versions!!
> > > And don't forget the NEW "Premier" Edition is just like last years
Deluxe
> > Edition - but only MORE EXPENSIVE! Yea!!!
> >

> We've been talking about it for weeks. I can't wait!! And since no one
can
> talk about because of the NDA - I've decided to break the NDA!!
> (tongue firmly planted in cheek)
> 2004 promises to bring:
> * Disappearing Payees just like in 2003 version! Yes, right before your
> eyes your Payees that you've used for years auto-magically disappear.
> * Barely able to run on a GHz machine! Just like recent Money versions
> we've always knew you loved the fact that this is one bloated piece of
> software.
> * Memory Eater Feature! You didn't think we'd actually lose this great
> feature. We'll use as much memory as possible for Money Express - even
> though it doesn't need it!
> * Moneycentral Non-Synchronization! That's right, we don't want MSFT
> software to communicate properly to other MSFT features! Who wants that?!
> - and there's even more features not included! -
> * Stock Options - NOT! - seriously who has these now after the dot com
bust?
> You don't need to be able to work with Stock Options in Money - use Excel
> instead!
> * Cash Flow is still just like 2003! Yep, we really wanted to mess with
> what people found functional in previous versions of Money so why ruin a
> good thing!
> *NEW BUGS! That's right!! NEW bugs!! Who would be happy if we didn't
> introduce NEW bugs with the OLD bugs we've left in from Money 2003 and
other
> previous versions!!
> And don't forget the NEW "Premier" Edition is just like last years Deluxe
> Edition - but only MORE EXPENSIVE! Yea!!!

> No sane person (the target
> audience for M2004) would be investing in 401K anyway.
And as someone who has a 401K why not?

> We've been talking about it for weeks. I can't wait!! And since no one
can
> talk about because of the NDA - I've decided to break the NDA!!
> (tongue firmly planted in cheek)
> 2004 promises to bring:
> * Disappearing Payees just like in 2003 version! Yes, right before your
> eyes your Payees that you've used for years auto-magically disappear.
> * Barely able to run on a GHz machine! Just like recent Money versions
> we've always knew you loved the fact that this is one bloated piece of
> software.
> * Memory Eater Feature! You didn't think we'd actually lose this great
> feature. We'll use as much memory as possible for Money Express - even
> though it doesn't need it!
> * Moneycentral Non-Synchronization! That's right, we don't want MSFT
> software to communicate properly to other MSFT features! Who wants that?!
> - and there's even more features not included! -
> * Stock Options - NOT! - seriously who has these now after the dot com
bust?
> You don't need to be able to work with Stock Options in Money - use Excel
> instead!
> * Cash Flow is still just like 2003! Yep, we really wanted to mess with
> what people found functional in previous versions of Money so why ruin a
> good thing!
> *NEW BUGS! That's right!! NEW bugs!! Who would be happy if we didn't
> introduce NEW bugs with the OLD bugs we've left in from Money 2003 and
other
> previous versions!!
> And don't forget the NEW "Premier" Edition is just like last years Deluxe
> Edition - but only MORE EXPENSIVE! Yea!!!