hiiii.how are you?
"JohnA" <John[at]TheAtas.org-spamguard> wrote in message
news:#LOHS#F2GHA.1040[at]TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
- quote -

- quote -

Maybe write a review on the comparison of GNU Cash vs Money :-)

"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:%23eI0NmG2GHA.4976[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

"JohnA" <John[at]TheAtas.org-spamguard> wrote in message
news:%23LOHS%23F2GHA.1040[at]TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
- quote -

John,

You may be right. I am only guessing. I am not a programmer and don't know
what can be done. My thoughts are that banks can make transaction downloads
available if they want (even if only in .qif format) and then users could
import that into Money. But if MSFT in fact disables all forms of downloads
and imports, that will be the last straw. I then switch to Linux and never
buy any MSFT software thereafter.

But I will keep using M2002 and simply type my transaction data in manually.
And I will keep using Excel 2000! I have always been an avid MSFT
fan and defender. But that is becoming harder given what has been happening
to Money.


Regards

Bill Wood

Hi William,

You write:

- quote -


They can't stop you from downloading since that is not governed by Money,
but do you really think they can't stop you from importing into Money? I'm
really suprised that you would think so since they wrote the software! As
you can tell, they indeed do control it. From the 2007 online agreement:
Online Services generally include the following functionality within
Microsoft Money 2007:

Financial Account Management

a.. Importing transaction, balance, and statement information for banking,
credit card, investment, and 401(k) accounts*.
b.. Importing transaction, balance, and statement information directly
from your financial institution.
c.. Background banking.

-- John

"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:eHHIqhD2GHA.4972[at]TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
- quote -

"Jim Johnson" <jamesone[at]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kpjig2t5bncl6vn2slp6bquc21plhksg4p[at]4ax.com...
- quote -


Yes, my understanding is that direct downloads from within Money and
background banking and quotes will be what expires after 2 years. I don't
see how MSFT can block manual downloads which can then be imported into
Money. Most of my downloads now are OFX active statement which I initiate
from the FL's website; these downloads are automatically imported into
Money. I like this arrangement fine and don't give a hoot about direct
downloads or background banking which I never used anyway. And even if I
loose quotes I'll live since I can get them free from many other sources.

Regards

Bill Wood

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 07:47:15 -0700, "William R Wood" <secret[at]???.netwrote:

- quote -

As I understand this I think the termination of downloads policy
refers to the automatic background banking. I think you will still be
able to do this manually - which is what I do anyway. If I'm wrong
please correct me (I'm talking account downloads (banking) etc. - not
sure about quotes etc.)

Jim

Dick,

You make many good points and your view of the future is probably correct.
If you are right, the future of personal finance software is pretty grim and
I don't intend to be a part of it. I feel safe for the foreseeable future,
maybe 5 years; after that I am prepared to manually download my transaction
data or even type it in manually if I have to. I don't care that much about
stock/bond quotes in Money since there is plenty of other software to track
investments. At age 62 our financial affairs are now pretty stable and
M2002 is really all we need. I'm teaching my wife how to use it and by the
time I drop over she should be ok. Now that I'm retired I have time to type
so MSFT probably is not getting any more money out of me for Money.

Regards


Bill Wood

My bonds price properly when I buy and sell and I think that happened well
before 2002 but being able to update bond prices via OFX would be very nice.
I have to update mine manually which sucks. If I had 100 bonds I would
think hard about upgrading to 2007 for that feature alone. So your point is
well taken. Thanks.

Regards

Bill Wood


"Michael Gordon, MVP" <gordonm[at]denison.edu> wrote in message
news:uW49Xz01GHA.3908[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

But most of what you write is only suitable for people who are still at M02
and earlier. Personally, I found M04 less buggy than M03 than M02. Copies of
M02 are hard to come by. (I might ebay mine...) One can't readily roll back
to M02 if one is already past it. The FAQ isn't tailored to people who are
way back level. Too hard. Agreed, M03+ comes with the issues you cite
relative to enforced cutoff date of services that are via MS. But M03+ is
probably the reality for most users.

I sent the post you referenced to my "FAQ update pending" folder. I think I
consider most of your comments as reflecting your specific experience with
M02 and your FIs not the general case for most users with most FIs and most
versions. (E.g., things like ability to download updates on reinstallation
and new defect discovery. Try, for instance, to lay hands on the M98 update
for floppy-spanning backup.) But I will reconsider the next time I do an
update. As always, I will attribute incorporated inputs liberally.

Several more comments inline. (remainder snipped)

"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:uOYRLO01GHA.328[at]TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Lots of people said that when quotes broke for M97 as well. Didn't quotes
break for M98 about a year after that? (Did they ever start working again?)
The FAQ doesn't say this effect occurs at a date certain. But the likelihood
that it will occur approaches 1 with some unknowable amount of time. I
believe this effect is even true for direct OFX downloads. I'd bet the banks
know **exactly** how many customers use the interface. Further, I'd bet they
consider the changes in that number every time they consider plans for
changes in their back-end infrastructures behind these interfaces and debate
budgets for their online activities. Given the rise of the screen scrapers,
the passage of time, and the general malaise in the personal financial
management software arena, my bet is that usage of the interfaces peaked
several years back and will only continue to decline. The FIs surely have
the data to see this. I don't have any data to prove this supposition. Do
you have any data that suggests otherwise?

- quote -

Makes sense. Didn't say it doesn't. But the further back you get, the more
likely the upgrade is problematic for one reason or other. As M98 users
trying to upgrade to M05+.

- quote -

You continue to disregard that continuing costs money. These costs sooner or
later need to be offset by revenue or somebody will get wise and pull the
plug. With people like Yodlee and CashEdge making a business model of
scraping, why should the banks give away a better data feed to very few
users when it costs money to do so? How many banks are just now breaking
into the online banking field? As noted in a post by Michael Gordon, I don't
think your experience translates to an equal probability of success across
the user base.

- quote -

As a long time reader, surely you understand that I'd like to see a better
Money as well.

I agree that auto termination of downloads is an anti-customer tactic. But
providing something that costs money free forever to someone who was a
customer years ago but isn't now just isn't a sustainable business model.
(The last time you put any money into the Money business model was what,
fall of 2001? Do you think the quotes they are serving up to you are without
cost to them?)

Maintaining existing customer loyalty? With customers like us, maybe that's
the last thing you want to do. Many users show up here still using M98, etc.
They're loyal as h*** to the product. Can't imagine a day without it. And
they still want support and quotes and fixes and so forth. That's a customer
you'd rather not have.

It's an ugly situation. If sales of Money fall off, will that convince
Microsoft to "turn over a new leaf and actually try to make Money a better
personal finance manager"? Sadly, I don't think so. I don't think they see
it as a market that has the kind of growth and revenue potential that
interests them. They've got fifteen years of experience pouring money down
that rathole. I think if sales went to zero for a new version, it would only
convince them to kill the baby once and for all.

When they've added power features (surely they have once or twice along the
way) have they grown the market? Nope.

Do they have any pricing power in the market? Clearly not. If they doubled
the price, they'd quadruple the theft and get nasty magazine reviews.

Have they added any power user features recently? (Take the S&S Budget in
M07...)

Where are they investing their resources? Essential *. MEss. I think they
are convinced that MEss is the Growth Direction for the product. "Most users
prefer" and all of that stuff...

Who do they view as their competitors? Bank web sites. Fidelity OneView.
Honest. That's who they think MEss competes with.

Who do they think their customers are? Not us end users. They are here
serving advertisers and trying to vector us to, say, Great Home Equity Loans
(that MSN properties can scrape a vig off of).

Hi Bill,
I can't remember when the most significant change -- learning how to really
price bonds -- happened; maybe before your version? But last year brought --
for the first time -- the ability to update bond prices via OFX. Given that
I oversee a portfolio with over 100 individual bonds, this ability is a
very welcome new feature.

Michael Gordon
MVP


"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:Oia4RQ01GHA.4976[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

"Michael Gordon, MVP" <gordonm[at]denison.edu> wrote in message
news:eLIEcjq1GHA.4448[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Michael,

What are the new bond features. We get a big part of our income from bonds
and I track our trades and the income in M2002 with no problems. I did have
big problems handling bonds in Quicken and that, along with Quicken's
inability to handle short sales, is why I switched to Money many years ago.

Regards


Bill Wood

"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:eXjwups1GHA.324[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Dick,

My multi-point analysis is in my above post replying to JohnA, 6 back, in
this thread dated 9/10/06 and time stamped on my computer at 5:55am, size
11kb. I basically don't agree with your points on this subject but I still
appreciate your FAQ because it allowed me to make a more informed decision
about upgrading.



- quote -

But your caveat is speculative. The fact is that M2002 still does
direct and OFX active statement and quote downloads. I use them just about
every day. Of course, it is possible that time may prove me wrong but that
is not too likely since so much time has passed already. Plus I am not
inclined to upgrade because something negative "might" happen to M2002. If
it does happen, I will take the necessary action. Meantime I still get to
use M2002 which works fine.

- quote -

I am not "counting" on permanent FL support, but I am not assuming that I
will loose it either. As noted in my multi-point analysis, I have signed up
with several new banks recently. They all support downloads to pre-2003
versions of Money. If banks that are just now breaking into the online
banking field and offering competitive deals voluntarily support old
versions of Money and Quicken what makes you think they will suddenly stop
doing that. They already have the tools setup to handle the downloads so
all they have to do is continue.



- quote -

I understood the intent of your FAQ to be exactly as you describe it. And I
thank you for that work because it helped me considerably. After all, you
are the recognized expert on all things having to do with Money, so if you
list the issues, I feel confident that I have, in fact, considered all the
issues necessary to make an informed decision.

I, on the other hand, am lobbying people not to upgrade. I think paying
MSFT for non-substantive upgrades rewards them for poor performance. I
especially dislike the auto termination of downloads policy. Nasty
anti-customer tactic. I'd like to see sales of new versions fall off in the
hope that MSFT would turn over a new leaf and actually try to make Money a
better personal finance manager in order to attract new business and
maintain existing customer loyalty.


Regards

Bill Wood

On the issue of whether downloads from older version will contine
indefinitely, a web site managed by First Clearling (Wachovia) states that
it "requires" Money/Quicken 2004 or later.


--
Michael Gordon
MVP


"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:eXjwups1GHA.324[at]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
- quote -

I agree completely. The reviews are generally shallow and clearly written by
people who don't actually use the stuff day-to-day. There are exceptions.
But I do think they have huge impact on what gets developed and what
features get aped by one or the other. I predict we'll see binary
attachments to Money transactions Real Soon Now. All the reviewers wet
themselves over the feature in Q.

"JohnA" <John[at]TheAtas.org-spamguard> wrote in message
news:Oppx5ws1GHA.1252[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Hi Dick,

I think rather than read reviews, it's much better to read this newsgroup
after a version of Money has been released and compare them with other
versions. A large upswing in complaints is usually indicative of an
unstable release - I think 2005 had the most negative postings of any
release that I can remember. This has seemed to work pretty consistently as
far as I've been observing. YMMV...

-- John

"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko[at]mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:%231gHkZm1GHA.4108[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

I have no problem with "not convincing" in the sense that you don't view the
real and potential issues cited as reasons to upgrade.

I don't, however, recall a multi-point analysis in this thread of real and
potential issues cited at http://umpmfaq.info/faqdb.php?q=174 that are not
accurate. Please identify what you think are inaccuracies and I will
consider fixing them.

From the history of your posts, the only caveat I can see adding is one
clarifying--or attempting to clarify--that, for versions prior to M03,
direct downloads **may** last longer and **may not** be subject to being
disabled as a function of time by Money itself. Even this caveat must apply
to pre-M03 versions, IIRC when the supposedly time-limited services were
rolled out.

You might also think that "Older versions will get 'unsupported' sooner by
FIs" is only a potential issue not a known issue. You seem certain that the
banks will support legacy interfaces, even if just for you, forever. Don't
count on that. There have been reports here just recently of OFX interfaces
getting taken down, IIRC.

The intent of the FAQ Q/A is NOT to lobby people to upgrade. It's just an
attempt to catalog issues one should consider in making the decision. If,
armed with knowledge, a reader elects not to upgrade, more power to them. I
skipped M05 and M06 and struggled for a while as to whether M07's "issues"
were worth the "change" to it. (M07 was hardly an upgrade except for the
performance and stability benefits afforded after the nuke-the-bill
exercise. Except for that, I find more things broken than fixed relative to
M04.)

"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:OXL3Lcm1GHA.4748[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

I don't disagree with you about the "dumbing down" of features, Bill -- just
wanted to point out that for some folks -- for example, those who have
investments in bonds -- new capabilities/features have been added. Whether
they're worth the trade-off is another issue.

--
Michael Gordon
MVP


"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:OUFmtAq1GHA.1568[at]TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
- quote -

"Michael Gordon, MVP" <gordonm[at]denison.edu> wrote in message
news:OUN3chp1GHA.3752[at]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
- quote -

Michael,

I agree. But I made it clear that I am a long time Money user interested in
the best possible feature set accounting wise.

I did personally compare later versions (2003-2006) and saw no new
substantive features like better budget management, better reports, a report
writer, better bills/deposits management, etc. The changes I saw were more
in style not substance. Some folks may prefer the new style but I like the
old simpler, cleaner interface.

Having followed this forum a fair amount I have not read about any new
useful (to me) features either. I have read about the so called "essential"
features and other changes which supposedly make the program easier to use.
I regard this dumbing down of Money as a major negative and believe such
features should be offered only in a separate program. I don't want my
software burdened with that sort of thing. But you are right many people do
use Money differently than me and features of that sort may be useful to
them.

But I still feel entitled to my main gripe. MSFT has not, as far as I can
tell, upgraded Money's core personal finance features since 2002. Therefore
upgrading gets me nothing except becoming trapped in MSFT's automatic
expiration of downloading policy. That is a step backwards not forward.

So, unless something changes, it looks like I have to use M2002 until MSFT
turns over a new leaf or some competitor comes out with a better personal
finance program.

Regards

Bill Wood

Jumping in on one specific point, Bill. You write
"The facts are that newer versions of Money do not have any substantive
features that are not already in M2002 - therefore there is nothing to
upgrade to."
but there's an important qualification which I think you're leaving out.
There aren't any features which are "substantive" to you. For other folks --
who may use Money differently than you do -- there may well be features
which merit an upgrade.

My 2¢.

--
Michael Gordon
MVP


"William R Wood" <secret[at]???.net> wrote in message
news:OXL3Lcm1GHA.4748[at]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
- quote -

"JohnA" <John[at]TheAtas.org-spamguard> wrote in message
news:ehPfuqh1GHA.1288[at]TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
- quote -

John,

You are obviously not reading my posts. I not only looked at the FAQ you
cited long before you cited it, I reviewed it again in response to your post
and typed out a multi-point analysis right in this thread explaining why the
various claims in that FAQ are not accurate or convincing. You keep saying
that I ignore warnings when in fact I consider them carefully. I have
stayed with M2002 because it works and no one has advanced a single valid
reason why I should upgrade. The facts are that newer versions of Money do
not have any substantive features that are not already in M2002 - therefore
there is nothing to upgrade to. If M2007 had features that are missing in
M2002, I'm sure you or others would have pointed them out long ago. The
various claims that M2002 will not continue to work are speculative - the
fact is that M2002 works perfectly. Until something changes (not likely
given all the time that has passed) or until MSFT comes up with a real
upgrade, I still see no reason to switch.

And you keep saying everyone's needs are different. What does that mean?
What needs are satisfied by M2007 that cannot be satisfied by M2002. You
seem to think that I am arguing with you for the sake of argument. But I am
merely looking for information. If upgrading would benefit me, I will do it
but I need facts, not speculation or unsupported conclusions to make that
decision.

Regards

Bill Wood