I wasn't trying to disagree. Indeed, I agree with most of what you wrote
save a belief that supporting old interfaces for small numbers of users is
cost-free to the banks and they will continue to do so indefinitely. Time
will tell on that score, I guess.

I also have moved on from M02--and, soon, from M04--but share many of the
objections that have kept you from moving on. I just weight them differently
in my calculus. And I don't even download, via direct or third party
connection.

"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:%23TZiUtBtGHA.4324[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Not that MSFT cares what I think, but just to be clear, I don't require
direct downloads. I am perfectly happy to go to my bank's website and click
a few clicks to download my transactions manually. So far all of my banks
use OFX so its still very easy. But I will take QIF or any other standard
download format that Money 2002 will read. These old download file formats
can last forever at little or no expense to the bank and zero to MSFT.
Eventually, if the banks do stop using these old protocols, I will type the
transactions in by hand. Heck, I'm retired now so I have the time and I can
indulge my reluctance to let MSFT screw me over.

And, as Ron said, I would pay MSFT an annual fee to keep my downloading code
up to date. Us old version users could pay $30 every Jan and download a
patch to update our code and everybody is happy. I don't want Money updates
because the idiots at MSFT keep changing the interface for no reason
whatsoever other than for the sake of change. They remove stuff I like, add
stuff I don't like, change report logic, and generally make the program
worse. I especially dislike the Money for Dummies approach in recent
years. What is the matter with them??? Money needs basic personal finance
improvements and a decent report writer. Where and when will these
substantive improvements come from??? I have not seen a material
substantive improvement since 2002.

At this point it looks like Money is as good as it will ever get. Well,
M2002 is still better than any of the newer versions from what I have seen
in my tests. So why should I upgrade? Why should anybody upgrade? Because
MSFT craftily figured out how to "force" upgrades by auto-expiring
downloads? I say fight back or MSFT and other companies will lead all of us
out to the woodshed over and over, forever.

Regards

Bill Wood





"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:%23pzzCK4sGHA.4872[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 06:10:45 -0400, Ron Rosenfeld <ronrosenfeld[at]nospam.orgwrote:

- quote -

I meant this statement, about no fee, to apply to Downloader, not to the vendor
services themselves. But with an add-in, free vendor services can also be
accessed.


- quote -

--ron

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:54:51 -0400, "Chris Cowles"
<spam_magnet[at]remove-me-bellsouth.net> wrote:

- quote -

What you write may be the reason that MS uses, but it sounds more like a
rationalization than a reason.

There are plenty of DB's out there that have been accessible for years by the
same programs. The Metastock Downloader of ten years ago can still access
stock prices from multiple vendors -- and there is NO annual subscription fee.

Perhaps Equis designed things properly to begin with.

OFX does not change that often (although there was a new release May 2006).
And the new versions are, I believe, backwards compatible at least to 2000
(when 2.0 was introduced). But it becomes a FI decision to switch.

Just to be clear, I don't object to the $30 fee every two years. I do object
to the meaningless features, bugs, and incompatibilities that accompany being
forced to change versions.
--ron

William's point in the past has been that a direct connection to the FI
should be independent of Microsoft completely. While I suspect he's correct
as far as a single connection goes, I suspect he's in for a shock as far as
the FIs willingness to support the old protocols forever. Why would the bank
spend one thin dime maintaining the obsolete connection--potentially just
for him--and the web site if Yodlee, and, by extension, Microsoft and Money,
are perfectly happy just dealing with the web site?

"Chris Cowles" <spam_magnet[at]remove-me-bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:eswmvs3sGHA.1596[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

A problem with that design is that Microsoft would have to maintain
separate servers to communicate with old versions of Money. Those servers
may also require old O/S versions that have been sunsetted, as well. Not
only is it a maintenance hassle, it's probably a security problem.

As new Money versions are introduced, new communications protocols are,
too. As the number of users on the old versions dwindles, the maintenance
cost per user of the old versions goes way up. Even if you're willing to
pay, few stay on the older versions, and the revenue probably does not pay
the bills. Microsoft simply makes a decision to pull the plug at some
point.

Clearly they have an interest in selling new software versions but I feel
confident that the maintenance issue influences their decision. I have no
proprietary knowledge of the subject.
--
Chris Cowles
Gainesville, FL


"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:ev41zU0sGHA.1288[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Ron,

- quote -

I couldn't agree more. Don't understand MSFT's unfriendly new policy. I
have no intention of ever upgrading to a newer version for the very reasons
you state. Luckily M2002 should work for the forseeable future. Even new
internet banks that I deal with support M2002 transaction downloads. Heck,
I will type in my transactions before I give in to MSFT's attempt to force
upgrades on me. It would be one thing if the upgrades were any good but as
you point out they generally create new problems rather than improve the
program.


- quote -

Regards

Bill Wood

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 06:07:00 -0700, "William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote:

- quote -

Thanks for that feedback, Bill.

Unfortunately, I don't have M2002. I tried it for a period of time, but (and I
don't recall the reason why), it did not work properly on my machine. So I
wound up with M2003 and, of course, am subject to the loss of internet services
because of that.

I, for one, would prefer to pay a fee to continue internet services on an
installed version of Money, than to be forced to change it every two years, and
have to waste my time dealing with the new bugs and incompatibilities that MSFT
seems to add to each release.

This crashing problem is a case in point.


--ron

Ron,

I used Moneydance 2005 (MD) for a few months last year.

I tried everything humanly possible to import my Money 2002 data into MD. I
cannot be done.

I ran MD side by side with Money 2002 for months. MD is pathetic compared
to Money. I have not tried MD 2006 but I seriously doubt that it is any
better from what I read on the MD forum.

MD is being developed on the side by a single person who has a full time
job. There is no way a part time programmer, no matter how good, can ever
complete this project. MD is fine I guess for super simple checkbook
balancing type operations but it has practically zero reporting functions
and I struggled at every turn to perform simple data entry and other
functions that Money handles with ease. My impression is that the only
people who can accept MD's limitations are MSFT haters who will use any
software no matter how bad just to avoid MSFT products. Most MD users
appear to run MACs or Linux. And the vast majority of MD users are
ex-Quicken people. MD handles Quicken data imports far better than Money.

I would recommend an extensive test of MD before abandoning Money. The best
alternative I have found so far is to use Money 2002. It ain't perfect but
it still works better than anything else I know of. And MSFT cannot disable
its downloading ability. And all of my banks support either direct
downloads or easy manual downloads using OFX files.

Regards

Bill Wood



"Ron Rosenfeld" <ronrosenfeld[at]nospam.org> wrote in message
newse7hc2l3ko42dj587b1cg2dngneuo9pn4t[at]4ax.com...
- quote -

On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 07:10:54 -0400, Don Awalt <dawalt[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

I've tried it and I could not get it to work on my data. It probably would
work if I had just a few accounts, and not much data. But the method doesn't
seem to work when dealing with multiple accounts, multiple investment
positions, lots of history and lots of transfers.
--ron

QIF export only covers a fraction of the total amount of information that
might be stored in a Money file. For instance, Payee detail information is
not exported. Loan accounts are not exported. Category and Account details
are not exported.

"Don Awalt" <dawalt[at]comcast.net> wrote in message
news:O6gq$ZjsGHA.1208[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Their site says this, have you used it and found this is not true?

Import data from Quicken and Money
Moneydance will import your data from Quicken or MS Money, or any other
program that exports data using the QIF format.

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
- quote -

Arghh! Since Microsoft forced me to change to M2007 (from M2003) because of
internet services, the M2007 program has been crashing repeatedly, but
inconsistently.

At first, it crashed whenever I would try to access the Bills section.
Reinstalling M2003, stopping the APAYS, reinstalling M2007 and doing a Remove
all Bills seemed to fix that.

Then it would crash when accessing the Lifetime Planner. Another repair (2nd
level) seemed to fix that.

Now it crashes after sending out EPAY's -- the crash comes after receiving the
acknowledgement message and the EPAY seems to be OK.

Interestingly, when I restart Money after one of these crashes, it first
displays a window with a "thermometer" and the label "Working". A more
informative explanation would be useful. My suspicion, since the Window looks
the same, is that it is doing the equivalent of msmoney.exe -s (salvage).

The other interesting observation is that if I do a Windows XP "clean boot",
this crash after EPAY acknowledgement does NOT occur. So it seems as if there
is some conflict with some other program.

This never happened with Money 2003.

Although the Investment Performance reports seem to be fixed, c/w M2003, the
ONLY reason I changed to M2007 was because of the loss of some of the Internet
services which I use (not syncing, but I do need quote downloads and it is
useful to be able to download information from my banks from within Money).

I would have gladly paid to continue the Internet service, without being forced
to change to this new version which is going to require more troubleshooting
than it is worth.

If Moneydance had had an easy method of extracting the Money data, I would have
switched.

If this crashing problem is not resolved by the end of the year, I will
probably just start the new year with a new Moneydance install and get rid of
Microsoft Money completely.


--ron