BBEdit is the leading professional HTML and text editor for the Mac. Specifically crafted in response to the needs of Web authors and software developers, this award-winning product provides a plethora of features for editing, searching, and manipulation of text. BBEdit transforms text with high performance. BBEdit is the leading professional HTML and text editor for macOS. BBEdit offers a 30-day evaluation period. Download it directly from us and dive in!
Older entries...
Jul. 13, 2009 Jul. 14, 2009 Jul. 15, 2009 Jul. 16, 2009 Jul. 17, 2009 Jul. 18, 2009 Jul. 20, 2009 Jul. 21, 2009 Jul. 22, 2009 Jul. 23, 2009 Jul. 24, 2009 Jul. 25, 2009 Newer entries...
item.95782
Adam Bezark
Okay, so Quicken's QIF export is (either accidentally or on purpose) so buggy that it makes exporting data to other applications virtually impossible.
What, then, about the alternative: starting over with fresh data? I've considered cutting off Quicken at, say, Jan 1 2009, and re-entering my 2009 data into a new program. I can always go back and look at my pre-'09 data in Quicken, but would have a fresh start in the new app.
So, absent the QIF issue, which of the competing apps are best? I've never seen a good comprehensive comparison, but would be very interested to know which ones perform best. Ready to flee Quicken any time I find a suitable replacement.
item.95790
E Weiker
As a longtime Quicken user I, too, was outraged over Intuit's lack of interest in the Mac community (never mind the guy on Apple's board). This time I decided I was going to switch. I downloaded every personal finance program I could find and decided to try them out. They all lacked some key feature I needed or were not stable enough until I found 'Prospects'. Great app! Polished, reliable and has everything I need. I does not do online banking but I don't need that feature. Take a look at
http://www.motimotion.com/prospects/
I would like to see this app succeed.
item.95793
Gregory Tetrault
Jeff Stearns said:
'When Mac Quicken exports your data into a QIF file, some records will be mangled, some will be dropped, and some will lose their relationship to other records in the file.'
That statement is wrong unless your copy of Quicken is corrupt. After I had trouble importing a massive Quicken QIF export (18 years of data with many accounts) into iBank, I looked up the QIF guidelines on the internet and then examined the QIF file in BBEdit. I saw that the QIF file had a consistent structure for each type of transaction, and that the structures followed the guidelines. The only 'flaws' I found were differences in the numbers of return characters separating entries, something that can be easily handled during import.
I imported my recently exported QIF file into a new user file in Quicken: everything worked perfectly. In contrast, iBank mucked up thousands of transactions. When I exported just my Quicken checking account file, iBank still had many import errors. Moneydance had only one consistent error when importing the big QIF file: when a split transaction in one account had a split item that linked to another account, Moneydance created the split transaction but also created a duplicate single transaction. The Moneydance programmer admits the bug is on his side: the QIF entries are fine.
If Quicken can import QIF files perfectly, and Moneydance can import QIF files almost perfectly, then I say that the import problems lie within iBank and other financial programs. The QIF format is simple to parse, and writing a good import utility should not be hard. (In the 1990s I wrote data extraction programs where the data structure was more complex and less consistent than QIF. I was pulling medical data out of an old mainframe, and the transfers had to be perfect. QIF should be a breeze compared to that.)
item.95801
MacInTouch Reader
I've tried all the other 'banking' programs and ultimately return to Quicken. I very hopeful they will make the needed improvements for Quicken 2010. It sounds like they are actively listening, for a change....
item.95819
Lance Agee
I have moved 10 years of Quicken Files to iBank. This includes bank account, credit cards and investment funds. As others have indicated it is a real pain to do so. The import into iBank had the additional problem of round off error. iBank does NOT properly round large numbers (an error they acknowledge). This requires you to play games with things like the stock price and commission to get the same value in the records between the two programs. (In my case the error was from a few cents up to a few dollars.)
When I got all the files correct (2-3 days worth of work) I found I could NOT check the investment values on my statement to those in iBank. First you can not select a date for the report -- the stock values are at the current date, not the statement date. Second, iBank has very limited number of reports and those must be used in combination with a chart. This is a very convoluted way of doing business, and the reports often do not include all the entries in the record. The reports are practically useless and clearly the worst part of iBank. I can not recommend using the program for investments until they give the user meaningful control over the reports.
Other that the investment reports, iBank is easy to use and I am able to do most everything I could do with Quicken. If they gave the user flexibility with the reports Quicken would be in big trouble; as iBank is faster and has a number of other advantages over Quicken.
item.95831
Thomas Casselman
I tried Mint and it is very nice for allowing you to see what transactions have cleared. Unfortunately, it does not have the complete capability of Quicken as it has no way of entering data into a register in fact it does not have a register system. This is of no use to me as I use Quicken to enter all my daily transactions into the registers for two my accounts at Chase. This way I can track my spending against an Excel budget worksheet that I have for each month of the year. Mint is nice in that it does not depend on Quicken QIF system to download transactions.
So, I hope that Quicken will work under Snow Leopard (OS 10.6). If not, I will set up a separate partition on one of my 4 internal HDs and run Quicken under 10.5.11 which it does now flawlessly.
Finally, I believe Intuit will never solve the problems they are having in developing a new version of Quicken. My guess is that their programmers are just not good and they make most of their money via Windows users. I believe there are programmers out there who could build a system with Quicken's capability.
Jul. 14, 2009
item.95857
Peter Neame
According to Intuit's blog on this topic, Quicken 2007 will run on Snow Leopard.
Which gives some breathing space for them to work out the inevitable bug fixes. Assuming a product appears....
item.95865
Michael Bayme
I've delayed commenting on the Quicken issue but now feel that must echo what one other user wrote - there's really nothing out there that works as well as Quicken once you're used to the Quicken paradigm of doing things. Now I've paid for iBank, Liquid Ledger and Moneydance, and have tried Money, iCompta, Buddi, etc, etc, etc.
Most of the other programs present transactions as a list with a separate are for editing the lists. You have to hit some button before entering a new transaction. Quicken lets one enter transactions 'in-line'.
Quicken allows all sorts of permutaions when entering dates - enter a single digit and you get that day of the current month and year, etc. Try that in ibank - you have to enter the day, month and year separately.
Quicken has the most intuitive system for reconciling statements - a separate window with running totals, etc until you have a perfect match with a statement. Moneydance is just about as good. iBank has a similar feature - but up until the absolute latest version had some funny notion that if you reconciled a transaction in one account that was linked to some other account then both accounts were considered reconciled (ie, transfer funds from checking to your credit card. In quicken you'ld reconcile the banking side when reconciling your bank statement - and the visa side when working on your credit card statement. iBank made a big mess of this system.)
Money and Liquidledger and most others don't have a notion of statements - one reconciles from the whole big list of transactions.
Now try reports - try making a graph of monthly income versus expense for the past year. Easy for quicken and moneydance. Sort of possible in icompta and Money. You can die in iBank before figuring it out - I had to e-mail support (embarassing for an experienced mac user!)
I could go on and on. Moneydance has gone through so many owners that I need a database to keep track of all the people I paid for various versions. Liquid Ledger seems to be run buy one guy in an attic in Toronto - updates every year or so. Prospects is also a guy in an attic - he writes that he hasn't even looked at Snow Leopard yet!
In short, Quicken works - and works well enough over the past 15 years that I find myself returning to it all the time.
Of course - if you want coverflow, etc - then go elsewhere.
My 2 cents.
item.95871
Skot Nelson
Re:
What, then, about the alternative: starting over with fresh data?
This is a viable way of moving to a new financial program, but it does have drawbacks with respect to the world of investments. Because investment rates of returns are often calculated using time weighted averages, you may lose what you consider to be useful information unless you enter each and every transaction: a chore for those of us who invest using weekly automatic withdrawal plans.
Of course the longer you're IN the new program, the less relevant the 'lost' time frame will be so if you're confident in your move...saddle up and mosey along by all means.
item.95876
Jerome Parmentier
I find it very interesting that some MacInTouch readers looking for a Quicken alternative also seem to be oblivious to the fact that Intuit has had somewhere between 15 and 20 years of time to develop the most recent version of Quicken for the Mac and that nearly all the other third party solutions are both much younger by a significant magnitude and competing products are all the work of a single developer or a much smaller software development organization than Intuit. You don't ask a baby to do calculus; in the same light you don't expect that a new software product is going to be feature by feature copy of a legacy product inside its first few years of development.
If the Mac community wants alternative financial software products from Intuit competitors, they need to be willing to accept some feature loss in the adoption of a younger and less developed product and then financially support its developers by paying the licensing fee and being vocal about the features and capabilities they want and the bugs they discover. The alternative is to continue to use an aging software product which is obviously not valuable enough to its developers to garner much new version development effort. Money flowing to independent developers will keep them working on their products and will generate more features and greater software stability. It is better to make this 'painful' step now than to end up being stuck with Quicken when Apple's hardware and software eclipse the Quicken product and Quicken is no longer functional on modern Apple platforms.
I let go of Quicken almost a year ago in favor of Moneydance. Moneydance is not perfect, but it is stable, accurate and very fast. Moneydance will import any current or legacy data download file and does not impose restrictions on what institutions you can download from or who you can accept a file from. The developer is active and does product patches every few months and a new version is supposedly in the pipeline. Moneydance accepted my Quicken export file at the time I converted with very little trouble. I only had to change a couple of very old transactions to correct an account balance. The interface is different from Quicken, but not worse. Once you get used to how Moneydance operates, you forget that you ever used a software product by a much larger developer. I think the same can be said for just about any competing financial software product; the interface will be different, but once you become used to it, that feeling will go away. There are reports and search functionality missing from Moneydance, but that doesn't prevent the product from doing the basic and essential things I expect from a financial software product.
The point is that the Mac community needs to stop complaining about the lack of a new version of Quicken and start putting its money in the hands of developers that want to make a competing product and who are listening and delivering on individual user requests.
item.95894
Dana Baggett
The admission by Intuit that it has wasted three years (!) on the development of a replacement for Quicken Mac 2007 that has disappointed them, beta testers and everyone else is stunning.
Adriel Frederick, Senior Product Manager - Quicken Mac, said on this thread on Sep. 13, 2008.
'We're releasing Quicken Financial Life for Mac this winter. Because we are committed to delivering a great user experience & a robust set of features on OS X Leopard and beyond, we have rewritten Quicken FiLife. Yes, a full rewrite.'
On July 9, 2009 Scott Gulbransen, Intuit's top PR guy, said
'Feedback from Mac customers led us to rethink our approach to developing Quicken for Mac. We went back to the drawing board and are making changes to everything from what the program does to how it looks...'
How many rewrites have there been/will there be?
All of this reminds me of what is probably an apocryphal story about Prof. Henry Kissinger. He supposedly received a doctoral thesis from one of his students. Kissinger handed it back the next day and said 'Is this the best you can do?' The graduate student admitted it wasn't, took it back and resubmitted it a few days later. This happened several times until the exhausted grad student said that he couldn't do any better. Whereupon Kissinger said 'Good. Then I'll read it.'
I'd like to ask Intuit. Is this the best you can do?
item.95909
Tim Lahey
I've tried several of the Quicken alternatives for the Mac, including the Wesabe web site (Mint isn't available in Canada). I've settled on the use of MoneyWell. It supports on-line banking for a number of banks (not mine, unfortunately), but it does do a good job of OFX/QFX importing for on-line banking data.
While I don't like some of the design decisions made in the product, I do like it on the whole and stick with it because of the excellent support the developer offered even before I was a registered user of it.
item.95916
MacInTouch Reader
I don't care if Quicken starts over or fixes, what I care about is being able to smoothly do everything that Quicken Windows can do. That includes interactive use with every company that Quicken Windows can do.
The have constantly evolved the Windows product and they know what such a program should be able to do.
Anybody who wants to compete for the Quicken power users has a clear target.
A pretty or simpler interface or more bells and whistles don't matter nearly as much as tracking and reporting what it is designed to do.
Jul. 15, 2009
item.95922
Gregory Weston
Michael Bayme comments:
'Prospects is also a guy in an attic - he writes that he hasn't even looked at Snow Leopard yet!'
Just as a point of fairness, though, I feel fairly confident in guessing that most developers haven't. I'm somewhat curious why you think he should have. If it's a 'normal' app and reasonably up-to-date there's little reason to expect it'll be troublesome.
item.95923
Jeff Schaffer
Boy do I agree with MacinTouch Reader:
'...do everything that Quicken Windows can do...'
They do precisely this with TurboTax. I just don't care about how technically hard it is to create a platform-independent core of Quicken from the Windows code, they could have been chipping away at it for years and it would have been over with long before now!
'A pretty or simpler interface or more bells and whistles don't matter nearly as much as tracking and reporting what it is designed to do.'
It's obscene that product managers treat the Mac like it's simply an arts and crafts platform for kindergardeners. While interface and interface consistency are important, anyone who thinks a coverflow interface in a financial package is more important than raw capability just isn't thinking straight.
item.95935
Bill Planey
It seems to me that a talented FileMaker Pro development team could build a run-time app that could replicate the financial reporting and calculating capabilities of Quicken; where they might have trouble is in some of the visual interface aspects. But I'm sure users would forgive that in no time. Certainly there could be amazing speed improvements, no loss in charting capabilities (they might need to license a plug-in or two), and significantly better data export.
The only hurdle would be, of course, the guarantee of the market being significant enough for the investment.
item.95940
Jim Robertson
I've used Quicken 2006 since its release, seen demos of Quicken Financial Life at two January MW Expos, seen references to the product disappear, then reappear on the Intuit website, but not seen anyone suggest the obvious (which I may do myself soon): run Quicken for Windows in my VMWare Fusion virtual machine.
My main concern in doing that will be creating a simple means to keep my data synchronized between my Mac Pro at home and my MacBook Pro on the road. It won't be so simple as it is now, where Synchronize! Pro X makes sure that both computers have the latest copy of the Quicken data file.
Has anyone else given up on a new Mac OS release and defected to just this one application under Windows? How do you back up your data or move it from one Mac VM to another?
item.95949
Steven Wicinski
Jerome Parmentier wrote:
'I find it very interesting that some MacInTouch readers looking for a Quicken alternative also seem to be oblivious to the fact that Intuit has had somewhere between 15 and 20 years of time to develop the most recent version of Quicken for the Mac '
I'd like to point out that while Intuit has had between 15 to 20 years of time to develop the most recent version, bear in mind that the last 5+ years of Quicken updates have pretty much lacked any real substance to the mix. I recall one version whose main selling point was backing up your data to .Mac.
More people would have liked it if they could find programmers who could figure out how to make the Windows/Mac codebases one (sans UI and API calls, of course) such that the Mac version could actually mature and be on a level with the Windows version.
item.95950
Michelle Steiner
I've been using Quicken 2006 ever since it came free with my first Intel iMac. It does way more than I would ever need; essentially, I use it as an electronic checkbook.
So long as it keeps working on an Intel Mac, I'll keep using it, but I probably would upgrade to an Intel native version; it's the only non-game app I run under Rosetta.
item.95957
Dick Moore
I was interested to see the post from a reader who wants Quicken on the Mac to do what Quicken does on Windows. I want just the opposite -- we run Quicken on a Dell laptop under XP and it is the most maddening, non-intuitive user interface I've ever seen, and when we're speaking of Windows programs and their generally poor UIs, that's saying a lot.
Several years back when I set up Quicken on the laptop, I exported the data needed from the Mac version. The import to XP resulted in the worst pile of doo-doo I've yet seen on a computer, with categories and transactions in different formats that were incompatible -- and I thought that was supposed to be easy. Took me the better part of a week to get things straightened out, so I can feel the pain of the folks who have a beef with Intuit.
Unlike many of the posters, I don't care about tracking investments, or managing credit card accounts, or communicating with the bank or other financial institutions -- I'm not running a business in which those things matter, I'm keeping a couple of checkbook registers. End-of-year reports for tax purposes are crucial to us, so reporting features are a big deal.
I cannot get the XP version to do the things I want, and it has a complete mind of its own about how it opens accounts and registers. We've been using it for several years and as yet neither one of us can figure out how to get anything done without re-learning the oddities, whereas Quicken on the Mac is simple, straightforward, sensible, and usable. I don't care if Intuit ever updates Quicken for the Mac as long as the 2004 version continues to work. It's running fine under Leopard on my Frakkintosh Intel box, and I hope it will work under Snow Leopard. If it doesn't then I'll look at Moneydance or Fontora -- I do want something that runs on both Mac and XP.
Jul. 16, 2009
item.96003
Bradley Price
Quicken has driven me nuts for years. I started using it on the Mac back in the System 7 days, then moved it to Windows 2000/XP and finally back to Mac OS X in 2006. At each Mac-Windows transition I lost years of data because Intuit INCREDIBLY provides no common file format or appropriate data import/export capability.
Having worked in software development for years, I find that simply amazing.
This is a fundamental part of product design, but it has eluded Intuit for years and years. It is, IMHO, absolutely inexcusable for a company with those resources. They must put an incredibly small amount of effort into actual product development, that's all I can conclude.
I still use Quicken 2007 on an Intel iMac, and it is clunky and slow. I don't care much about the investment tracking junk in the Windows version, but I'd feel much more secure and happy if it were a Universal app with a real common data format.
item.96004
Chuck B
Re:
'I've been using Quicken 2006 ever since it came free with my first Intel iMac. It does way more than I would ever need; essentially, I use it as an electronic checkbook.
So long as it keeps working on an Intel Mac, I'll keep using it, but I probably would upgrade to an Intel native version; it's the only non-game app I run under Rosetta.
Bingo. I still use Quicken 2005 and passed on all subsequent upgrades because the darn thing is still PowerPC code. It is the ONLY thing I run that uses Rosetta. Intuit doesn't get a dime from me until they fix that, and I don't care at all what 'features' they add.
item.96018
Paul Kazanjian
Jim Roberston writes that he has 'not seen anyone suggest the obvious (which I may do myself soon): run Quicken for Windows in my VMWare Fusion virtual machine.'
Of course, that is exactly what I do. I keep my Quicken data file on a Windows XP file server and access it using Quicken 2009 running under Windows XP on an iMac via Parallels. I can also access the file from my ThinkPad. I depend on Parallels to run 3 applications that I can not run/replicate on a Mac, Quicken is one of them.
item.96025
Dana Baggett
I agree with Steven Wicinski's comment that Intuit hasn't just thrown away the last three years developing QFLM, they've been treating Quicken for Mac as a marginal product for many years.
There's an interesting (to me) review of Quicken Mac 2007 here that really lays it on the line about Intuit's historic neglect. I'll quote a few of the writer's remarks written three years ago, on Aug. 1, 2006 when Quicken Mac 2007 was released.
'My biggest problem with Quicken is really a problem with its maker, Intuit. More than a year ago, Apple revealed to the world their plan to migrate to Intel processors. Nearly eight months ago, they shipped their first Intel-based machines. Today, the product line is nearly completely transitioned, and the rumor-mill suggests that the last of the Intel machines will appear at this year's WWDC in a week's time. I hope you can see where I'm going with this, because Intuit obviously didn't.
'You see, Quicken 2007 is not Universal. This in inexplicable, and inexcusable. Quicken is not Photoshop and should not take herculean efforts to compile with the Universal flag enabled. It's not calling any hardware, it's not doing any insanely-complex math. Interestingly, Quicken 2007 is still in Carbon, and more importantly, it's still a CFM executable ' that's OS 9 technology there, folks. And therein lies the problem.
'Only Mach-O applications support Universal-ity, and CFM crapware gets left in the dust. The last several versions of Quicken have not supported OS 9, even via Carbon, yet the application is still maintained in this state. Sacrificing ease of integrating new OS X technologies, performance, and a handful of other goodies that come along with modern code-bases, Intuit spent a year of development adding a 401(k) widget and recasting a scheduled transaction.
...
'Now, to be honest, there are valid reasons to keep Quicken in CFM, but most of them add up to costing too much or taking too long. It seems they're using Metrowerks CodeWarrior, so they would presumably need to undertake a non-trivial conversion to XCode, and then there are the inherent difficulties in converting from PEF to Mach-O, et cetera, et cetera.
'Truly, even Microsoft made the same decision in its development cycle with Office for Mac. But there's a key difference. New versions of Office are cram packed with new features, for better or for worse2. They've made a judgement call and decided to allocate their engineering resources to new features rather than moving their code base to a new binary architecture. I can't really fault them for that.
'Intuit, on the other hand, hasn't really provided us with either. The new features have rather limited appeal, especially when you consider that last year's lone major new feature was .Mac Backup. The code base stagnates, as does the feature set. One has to wonder how many developers Intuit even devotes to Quicken for Mac, as the last two years worth of features would seem to amount to only a couple of days of development time. Total... '
Intuit has really inherited the years of neglect it gave this product - and us.
Jul. 17, 2009
item.96058
Jerome Parmentier
Dana Baggett brings forth some very concrete points associated with the current state and overt lack of development on Mac Quicken. A couple days ago I spoke only about how unreasonable it was for Mac users to expect that younger financial management products that don't have the R&D budgets that are potentially available to Intuit won't behave or offer the same features or functionality, at least not in versions 1, 2, 3 or possibly more.
However, if the underpinnings of Mac Quicken are so dated as to prevent Intuit from releasing a universal or Intel native application, can't we conclude that Quicken's coffin is already sealed and that we should, as a computing community, be moving on instead of hoping that the corpse of Quicken will jump to life again? Even with Apple's market penetration increasing, I'm inclined to believe that the marketing and sales number crunchers at Intuit are having a hard time justifying providing sufficient financial resources for proper application development. When they compare their margins for Windows Quicken to Mac Quicken, that makes for an even more convincing case, even if it is misguided.
It sure sounds to me like they are looking at a total code rewrite and their bean counters aren't providing the resources necessary. And let's face it, Quicken Financial Life for Mac wasn't going to be a full version of Quicken anyway. It was going to have lots of eye candy and implement a great deal of Apple's interface elements, but for the 'investment trackers' out there, the product was going to fall very short. It would have been many steps back based upon what I have read and heard and we all would have been better off anyway moving to Moneydance or any of the other capable, independently developed products if that were the case.
I openly admit I'm not a programmer or developer, however what I'm confused about most is why, now that Apple is shipping all Intel hardware, that Intuit doesn't just scoop up the Windows Quicken code that is already Intel native, reprogram for the appropriate interface calls for the Mac, and then release that? Assuming that this is a reasonable thing to do, wouldn't that also bring the Mac Quicken functionality on par with the Windows product? I'd love to hear responses to this?
item.96074
Wynn Pickelsimer
Picked this up on a Quicken blog site:
http://blog.quicken.intuit.com/2009/07/09/quicken-for-mac-coming-in-february-2010/
Quicken for Mac Coming in February 2010
July 9, 2009 9:51 am, posted by Scott Gulbransen | ShareThis
Recent media and blogger coverage has led to some speculation that Quicken may not release a new Quicken desktop product for the Mac.
We'd like to clear the air: Intuit will release a new version of Quicken for the Mac platform in February 2010.
We know you've heard this before. In early 2008, we told you we'd release Quicken Financial Life for Mac later that year. 2008 came and went and we did not. At Macworld 2009, we told you it would be later this year.
But after speaking to customers at Macworld 2009, and opening our public beta of Quicken Financial Life for Mac to thousands of you, we learned the product was not doing what we - nor customers - wanted it to do.
We listened, and we learned.
Feedback from Mac customers led us to rethink our approach to developing Quicken for Mac. We went back to the drawing board and are making changes to everything from what the program does to how it looks. We spent extra time building a reconcile mode for the new register, a robust Windows-to-Mac transfer function for new Mac users (and existing customers running Quicken on a Windows virtual machine), and redesigned the experience to make it look and feel like a native Mac application should.
We understand our loyal Mac customers are disappointed that the product won't be in stores until after the first of the year. For that, we apologize. We think taking our time to get it right will be well worth it and will make Mac customers even more excited when they use the new Quicken for Mac early next year.
You can go to Quicken.com beginning October 12, 2009 to pre-order Quicken for Mac. We'll also continue to provide updates on our blog at www.quicken.com/blog.
Thanks for your patience and for being loyal Quicken for Mac customers.
Jul. 18, 2009
item.96093
Adam Newman
OK - the Intuit blogger, after admitting that Intuit has more-or-less totally dropped the ball on the Mac community for years, would like us to pre-order Quicken for Mac FOUR MONTHS before they think they will release it?
Uh-huh...sure. Are they actually thinking that demand will be so great that we won't be able to find it in stores?
Forgive me my skepticism... but you've just GOT to be kidding...
I've yet to see a computer software product that you simply can't find on the release day, never mind one that has the dubious history of Quicken...
Sheesh!
That's my $0.02
item.96104
Rick Owen
The Quicken for Mac announcement of a new version coming in Feb 2010 is great. However, it is not exactly as altruistic as Intuit advises. It seems Intuit, and many others, were stunned that Microsoft abruptly folded their tent and left the finance software game. Intuit suddenly realized they were the remaining kingpin in financial software. So, instead of writing off Quicken, Intuit has put their first team in place to reap the harvest in both the Mac and Windows worlds.
Good news for us.
item.96106
Wil Nelson
A good basic alternative to Quicken for Mac is Prospects by Motimotion at http://www.motimotion.com/prospects/. It works on Leopard and up.
I have tried others like Money Dance etc., and this is the best alternative to date for a basic home finance program. The developer continues to improve the product.
item.96110
Brian Winslow
In the quoted press release from Intuit announcing yet another delay in the next version of Quicken for Mac, one phrase tells us everything we need to know. After all this development time, they had to go back and add - as an afterthought - the ability to reconcile a register. I remember doing that in Quicken in 1989! It staggers the imagination that they considered that a lower priority, but at least they listened to feedback and made changes.
Quickbooks had the same problem as QFLM: two years of development time, and the biggest new feature was Cover Flow for reports. The two most-important, most-requested features are still AWOL. I refer, of course, to multi-user support and fully-integrated Payroll comparable to what Windows users have.
Listen up Intuit: functionality should come first, along with a modern code base and a stable file format. When you've got that covered - with full platform parity - then worry about the eye candy.
FWIW, I will not buy Quicken for Windows as an alternative - the bean counters at Intuit would like nothing better than to eliminate Mac demand, but they won't get the satisfaction from me.
item.96111
Dana Baggett
The forthcoming replacement for Quicken Mac will NOT be called Quicken Financial Life for Mac according to a note on the Quicken Inner Circle posted by Andrea W. - Leader, Quicken Inner Circle. (My take: damage control. Too much negativity surrounds that failed project.)
The 'new' name? Quicken for Mac. I kid you not!
This could be a good sign if only because it invites direct comparison with other Quicken products. On the other hand, that didn't prevent Intuit in the past from allowing Quicken for Mac to rot on the shelf.
item.96114
Gregory Tetrault
[Re: 'Intuit will release a new version of Quicken for the Mac platform in February 2010.'...]
A short time ago, after deleting all references to Quicken Financial Life from its website, an Intuit spokesperson said that beta testers panned QFL. Intuit was going to redo its next Mac release from the ground up. Note: It took Intuit almost three years to release a beta of QFL. Intuit now says that a new version of Quicken for the Mac platform will be ready next February. Does anyone believe that Intuit will accomplish this with one-fifth the development time as QFL? I don't, and I recommend that Mac users write-off Quicken for Mac.
I stopped buying Quicken updates at the 2004 version. Intuit always had fewer features on its Mac versions. Its policy of separately charging banks and financial institutions for Windows and Mac licenses meant that most did not buy the Mac license and some bought neither license. (I was unable to connect with my bank, credit card companies, brokerage firm, or investment firms.) Intuit then started a new policy of crippling old Quicken versions by modifying the data exchange formats (including stock and fund quotes). I switched to Moneydance that readily connects to my bank and my investment firms and imports QIF, OFX, and OFC files. Most financial institutions download in at least one of those formats.
item.96120
MacInTouch Reader
So they already admit they will not address the biggest gripe I have about Quicken...
' a robust Windows-to-Mac transfer function for new Mac users (and existing customers running Quicken on a Windows virtual machine)'
Why is a different database format even required? This differentiation between PC and Mac is why I am motivated to switch. Primarily because of the on-line transactions that require financial services companies to make a decision about unique support and costs for the Mac. Which many decide they can't deal with.
I can handle Quicken's clunkiness and bugs that have been in the program for 10 years and never addressed, version after version... but having to deal with limitations on banking support is unacceptable. Unfortunately, after trying most of the alternatives mentioned here, I haven't found anything with the automation that Quicken has.
Jul. 20, 2009
item.96176
Monty Lee
I used to beta test their Mac software (several years ago) and pointed out every year numerous problems with the investment module. Simple things like decimal alignment, short sales, and money market returns were never addressed -- even though readily available in competing programs in the early days. Once the competition disappeared (for the Mac at least), Intuit just didn't want to address the numerous problems but tried to 'wow' users with dubious additions. Even today Intuit has (so far) failed to address the Mac Sync problem because Apple changed the name. You can't sync because .mac is hard coded in the program.
Granted, some program additions were great (Bill Pay), but many were buggy or not properly implemented (as many users have pointed out). I still use Quicken for the Mac, but would welcome a robust product that could easily outshine Quicken.
item.96181
Dan Gillmor
My only question is why anyone believes *anything* Intuit says about Quicken/Mac at this point...
Jul. 21, 2009
item.96210
Adam Newman
I have a question for everyone here. I have VERY basic Quicken-type needs - basically I want to be able to download my bank statements from chase.com (yes - I'll have to ask my bank about fees, etc.) and have them loaded in a quicken-type register.
My needs are simply to have stuff marked for tax purposes. Since Intuit's Mac history is what it is, are other programs out there capable of taking the file downloaded from my bank and importing it without much fuss?
If not, I've got a late-2008 aluminum MacBook - is an older version of Quicken on my install DVD's where I could try that?
Thanks!
item.96220
John Fallon
Comment to Monty Lee: the .Mac sync for Quicken 2007 does work with my .me account. I can check my iDisk and see the new file in there.
item.96231
Jon McIntosh
Monty Lee states...
'Even today Intuit has (so far) failed to address the Mac Sync problem because Apple changed the name. You can't sync because .mac is hard coded in the program.'
Hmmm. I have used the .Mac/Mobile Me backup feature continuously since it became available. I just checked to make certain it is working. I'm using Quicken for the Mac 2006, 15.0.5 - R6. Maybe there is something else going on with your system?
item.96235
Grandy Pollo
I use Quicken, admittedly Quicken 2001 since debits and credits haven't changed in centuries, and I use it in Parallels, in Windows.
When I read advice from Quicken about the miserable results to expect in using Mac Quicken with Windows Quicken files (e.g losing all price history on stock trdes and more), and since Parallels costs less than Quicken does I have the ability to use Windows as needed, and enjoy Quicken without issues.
I wonder why other people don't just use the Windows version and give up on expecting anything for mac as there seems to be little promise and the cost will be at least as much anyway.
item.96254
Paul Jacoby
Why does Intuit think they need to develop a *different* product for the Macintosh? For goodness sake, just give us the current Windows product, verbatim, feature-complete, running under OSX and they are *done*.
There are no specs to write. There are no capabilities to consider and prioritize. There is no need to determine 'What Mac users want.' There are only a few GUI decisions to make and maybe some pretty packaging to design.
Maybe that's what they are doing, and how they plan to make a February 2010 release date....
Jul. 22, 2009
item.96272
Mel Krewall
Adam Newman asks
'I have VERY basic Quicken-type needs - basically I want to be able to download my bank statements from chase.com and have them loaded in a quicken-type register... are other programs out there capable of taking the file downloaded from my bank and importing it without much fuss?'
While I still use Quicken because of a couple specific needs, I tried out iBank recently and was successful in downloading my Chase transactions into the iBank check register. If Adam just needs basic functions I would recommend he look into iBank.
item.96279
Dana Baggett
I tend to agree with Dan Gillmor at this point. He said 'My only question is why anyone believes *anything* Intuit says about Quicken/Mac at this point...'
I joined the Quicken Inner Circle so I could see what Intuit's own staff is saying. On a thread entitled 'Quicken for Mac (Formerly Quicken Financial Life)' a poster asked an entirely reasonable question.
'I read that QFL has been delayed till 2010 and actually the product is being re-written, so is the download beta now defunct? That is, there is no point in trying it?
Now read what 'Quicken Dan said in response on July 21.
You should continue to use the beta you have. While we are indeed taking more time to rethink a number of features, we are not throwing away what we have wholesale, so the beta you have is still perfectly valid. We're trying to get an updated beta out 'around' the end of the month - it's all dependent on when a couple of new features are tested and ready enough to go out.
Sorry about the confusion.
Compare that statement with the one issued by Intuit on July 9 and printed above in several places 'We went back to the drawing board and are making changes to everything from what the program does to how it looks.'
Hello?
item.96282
Ben Levi
Responding to Adam Newman:
I have used Quicken 2006 to download my Chase transactions for years; it works perfectly, once you enable it on your Chase.com web account, and set it up in the Accounts section of Quicken. As for marking stuff for tax purposes, Quicken offers that feature in the Chart of Accounts (Categories/Lists) to assign a category to a specific tax related IRS form. From there you can print reports by category that should give you what you need for tax purposes.
item.96286
Gregory Tetrault
Adam Newman said:
...I have VERY basic Quicken-type needs - basically I want to be able to download my bank statements... and have them loaded in a Quicken-type register. My needs are simply to have stuff marked for tax purposes...
Moneydance can meet your needs. It can do direct downloads if your bank supports them. If not, Moneydance can import downloaded files in three common formats. Before you accept each downloaded or imported entry, you have the opportunity to assign a category such as 'Books' to a transaction. You also can split a transaction into numerous parts, each with a category. After you've done this, each subsequent download or import with the same name will, by default, get the split transaction and category assignments you set up before. For example, each time I connect to my bank and review my paycheck entry, it has my usual six split transactions. If I get a raise (hah!), I just put new values into net pay and into each split, and they become the new defaults.
With proper use of categories, it is easy to generate reports for tax purposes. If you need more flexibility, you can export the data and use a spreadsheet or database.
For your needs, iBank would also work. It doesn't have all the capabilities of Moneydance, but it has a friendlier user interface and is easier to learn.
item.96291
Michael Schmitt
Reply to Paul Jacoby [who wrote]:
Why does Intuit think they need to develop a *different* product for the Macintosh? For goodness sake, just give us the current Windows product, verbatim, feature-complete, running under OSX and they are *done*.There are no specs to write. There are no capabilities to consider and prioritize. There is no need to determine 'What Mac users want.' There are only a few GUI decisions to make and maybe some pretty packaging to design.
Be careful what you wish for.
Users of Mac Word 5 demanded feature parity with Word for Windows. In 1994 Microsoft responded by releasing the infamous Mac Word 6.0.
item.96292
David Johnson
Because that gives those of us who don't to use Windoze an inferior product with no chance of getting a good one.
item.96301
MacInTouch Reader
To Grandy Pollo on why we don't use Quicken For Windows:
I like knowing I'm secure from malware trying to steal all my Quicken info; it's very easy: Windows is worthless for security and problems.
item.96311
Tim Lahey
To Adam Newman, MoneyWell which I mentioned earlier has direct connect banking for some banks and will do import of the downloaded files for those that don't. My bank doesn't have direct connect banking with MoneyWell, but I can download the QFX or OFX file and import that data fairly easily.
Moneywell has a free demo (limited in the number of transactions) so you can try it. Plus, the developer is quite responsive so I'd expect that any questions you might have will be answered promptly.
item.96313
Rick Chin
Whatever Quicken does, let's hope they get a clue and make it so Mac users can download bank transactions with every institution they support on Windows. The whole structure that makes banks pay separately for Windows and Mac users to download data is so discriminatory and completely unnecessary. The underlying data is the same. If the file transfer process is different, stop that! Make them the same!
How invalid is this thinking? Are there different gas pumps for Chevys and Fords? Replace Mac/Windows with race, religion, or gender and see if it would be tolerated!
item.96316
Colleen Thompson
With regard to .mac/MobileMe syncing... I discovered the hard way (well, it was hard for my client) that the .mac moniker only works with your MobileMe account if you were a member prior to the MM rollout. In other words, my email address works with both @mac.com and @me.com. But someone who recently signed up for Mobile Me can only use @me.com.
So, perhaps this is why some people can still sync Quicken with .mac and some can't; the newer, non-grandfathered members would be unable to sync because their logon won't recognize .mac.
Jul. 23, 2009
item.96348
Albert Kinderman
I use gnucash ('GnuCash is personal and small-business financial-accounting software, freely licensed under the GNU GPL and available for GNU/Linux, BSD, Solaris, Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows.') It will import all your ofx/qfx downloads (and download stock quotes).
item.96371
Jeff Schaffer
I miss the participation of Bob Meighan, Intuit's VP for TurboTax, during the intense discussion earlier this year over multi-return pricing. Many of us disagreed, but Bob hung in there, heard us, made Intuit's case (such as it was), and was here to announce their policy change.
Why do I feel that Quicken Mac is run by a headless horseman? (Sorry, best I could come up with in a hurry!)
item.96396
Alex Kac
Dana Baggett wrote:
...Compare that statement with the one issued by Intuit on July 9 and printed above in several places :'We went back to the drawing board and are making changes to everything from what the program does to how it looks.'
Hello?
That makes sense. Intuit wrote a whole new app with a hopefully good backend and framework. They designed the UI and feature set on top of that UI to work a certain way and got feedback from Mac users that it sucked. So instead of throwing the baby with the bathwater they are rewriting those features, redoing the interface, and adding new features to make it more like what Mac users want.
[This is speculation on your part, Alex? (Or do you have specfic, inside information about what Intuit is doing with Mac Mac development?) -MacInTouch]
Jul. 24, 2009
item.96402
Dana Baggett
In the interest of providing some specific info about what Intuit is doing with the 'new' Quicken for Mac, I thought I'd post here some comments that Intuit employees have posted on the Quicken Inner Circle forum. I'll try to keep the clips in context while cutting out extraneous stuff. Also, these comments are typically responses to prior posts which, for space reasons, I do not include.
From 'Quicken Adriel' (who I believe is Adriel Frederick, Senior Product Manager - Quicken Mac) on July 21.
'1. We know that Mac users and PC users care about investments. I'll be frank - the needs across platforms are pretty much the same and we know that. While it may sound like an excuse, we have to make tough feature choices and some investments features fell off the table. With limited resources especially when rebuilding Quicken for Mac from the ground up, we have to make tough tradeoffs. That means check printing, investment registers, Bank Bill Pay, Quicken Bill Pay and dozens of other features didn't make it in. If we had unlimited resources, it'd be done. We're listening, but it doesn't mean we can do everything you ask.
'2. Download data directly from your bank to Quicken. ... The new Quicken for Mac supports importing data directly into Quicken from your banks. We don't support qif - but that file format has been deprecated. Also, there's a lot more that you'll see in the next Quicken for Mac that will address this point - I can't say more than that at this point.
'3. Forcing upgrades. We have not sunset Quicken Mac 2005, 2006 or 2007 although all three of them are now past the period we said we would support them. While we maintain the right to change that in the future, we haven't yet - I hope that's a signal that we are being cognizant of your needs when saying which versions we support.
'4. Data Transfer
We sucked at this in the past. However, we currently support data transfer to the new Quicken from previous Mac versions and Windows conversion will begin testing soon. If we don't use your data, we won't import it (no investment transactions).
'5. Bill Pay
This went the way of investment transactions. We looked at the complexity of developing and the number of users that would adopt it versus all the other things we had to build with limited resources and it fell off the table. We'll look at it for future versions.
'6. Multicurrency
The new Quicken for Mac supports multiple currencies. It's also built at the core to support multiple languages...'
From 'Quicken Dan' posted on July 16, 2009:
' ... I would encourage people to view this delay not as a wholesale repudiation of what we had built so far (it is not), but as a chance to buy us the time to fill in the blanks where we just weren't doing enough. Absolutely, there are still going to be holes and we're still not going to make everybody happy, but we're really doing our level best to try to hit the things that will help the most users. Keep in mind that as self-selected interested parties, the members of this forum are virtually by definition advanced users, and also by definition the users we're most likely to disappoint in our initial release - for that I am truly sorry. I assure you that this is not due to lack or respect for Mac users - every member of our core team is a Mac user and a die-hard Mac fan.
'I know I've said this so many times I sound like a broken record, but duplicating what we had (or what Windows has) is very, very hard, particularly for a small team in a (relatively) compressed time frame in a business environment that can only be described as 'extremely challenging.' Sure, some stuff is easy, but often what looks like a simple feature on the outside has far-reaching implications and incredible depth. Sometimes a feature only existed to mitigate a flaw in the implementation of something else, in which case it really needs to be completely rethought or possibly just discarded. You'll have to take my word for it when I say that if it was easy to 'just' rewrite Quicken Windows or even Quicken Mac 2007, someone would have done it by now...'
'Quicken Dan' on July 22:
'I hate to pull the 'I just work here' card but in this case I really can't speak to the level of resources and whether it's appropriate or not, at least not in any detail. Right here at ground level the resources are what they are and we're making the best of it that we can - budgets are tight across many industries, and the software business (particularly desktop software) is no exception.
'I will say that just throwing warm bodies at a project doesn't necessarily bring it in faster (see 'The Mythical Man-Month'). Intuit may be big, but Mac desktop software is just one part of what is a very big puzzle... '
'Quicken Dan' again on July 23:
'I don't work on the Quickbooks team, so I can only speculate as to why they got to market before us. It may have something to do with the fact that their product costs nearly three times as much, or that their sales justified a greater investment. I'm also pretty sure they got started on their modernization effort a great deal sooner than we did - if I recall correctly I was still working on Quicken 2006 or 2007 when they got underway.
'They also had the distinct advantage of operating from a codebase that was several generations newer than ours - our product had been around for some 16 revisions (which is more than 16 years since we skipped one or more years) and while we pretty much had to start over from scratch in order to get out from under our legacy burden, their much younger application was able to make the transition with less upheaval.'
There's more, of course, but the above reflect accurately the points the posters are making, like it or not.
Jul. 25, 2009
item.96460
Gregory Tetrault
Dana Baggett, thank you for those interesting and amusing comments from Intuit's site. I love the way Intuit decided to rip out all the features that distinguish Quicken from newer competitors such as iBank and Moneydance. Does anyone at Intuit think that this might be a marketing problem?
I also like item #2 stating that the new Quicken version will support direct downloads from banks, but not in QIF (or any other openly available format). No, Intuit will use its latest proprietary format, the one that requires each bank to buy two expensive licenses to support their Windows- and OS X-using customers. Past and current experience shows that many banks buy only the Windows license and that some banks buy neither. Competing products support downloads from banks without licenses.
It is obvious that two decades ago Quicken was built with a cumbersome database. This has plagued Intuit's programmers throughout Quicken's life, but Intuit won't bite the bullet and start over with a better database (perhaps licensed from a third party). Intuit has treated Quicken as a cash cow, but she's old, doesn't produce much milk, and needs frequent (and costly) veterinary care. Intuit should put her out to pasture, buy a purebred calf, and raise a really good milker. Otherwise, Quicken will rapidly become irrelevant.
item.96483
James Taborn
I'm using Quicken for Mac (2007). By and large, I've been very satisfied with this product, and justified or not, I believe that the Quicken Mac team is doing the best it can with available resources. Whether the new version comes out in Feb or June is irrelevant to me (as long as the 2007 Quicken continues to work).
I'll probably buy the new version, in large part because I want to support software companies that write programs for the Mac platform. However, not being able to print checks will be a deal breaker for me, and if anyone from Quicken is monitoring this thread, please consider adding it to your next version (earlier post said that check printing was dropped).
item.96472
John Fallon
Given that supposedly 91% of PC purchases over $1000 go to Apple, the OS X software market may look more desirable to potential developers.
Without online or bank bill pay and investment registers, though, there's not a lot left to induce someone to buy Quicken.
item.96475
MacInTouch Reader
I'm surprised that they've decided that bill pay isn't important enough to make the first cut. I contracted at Intuit in 2000, and my job was to validate banks' OFX compatibility with Quicken (Windows version), with special emphasis on bill pay. During that period, the a development build of first Mac version that handled OFX was sent to us for testing OFX compatibility, but another team member (a permanent employee) handled that.
Personally, I don't use Quicken Bill Pay, nor bill pay through my bank, because it costs about ten bucks a month, and I can just as easily pay on line at the various creditors' web sites.
item.96485
Jim Robertson
Dana Bagget, quoting 'Quicken Adriel':
5. Bill Pay
This went the way of investment transactions. We looked at the complexity of developing and the number of users that would adopt it versus all the other things we had to build with limited resources and it fell off the table. We'll look at it for future versions.
They MUST be kidding! Quicken Mac has supported bill payment from within the application for over a decade. Does ANYONE think watching virtual check images or account registers float by in 'Cover View' can substitute for using a financial management program to manage one's finances?
item.96486
Thomas Casselman
I was quite surprised to read that check printing has been eliminated in the next Mac version of Quicken. I understand some of the decisions Intuit has made as to what will be in the new version. But check printing is part of the core program.
Let's face it. Intuit started as a small Mac-based software company in Palo Alto then grew with the Windows explosion and started to ignore Mac users early on. They seem to have gotten to the point where it was not necessary to support Mac users as the bulk of their profits was coming from Windows users.
I feel that [some Intuit] comments were extremely self serving. Yes, Quicken is a humongus program but it is not rocket science. If Intuit really cared to put out a good product, they would have brought in 4 or 5 top software engineers and turned them loose. Notice that Intuit is responding to Mac users complaints and my guess is that they are feeling the pinch of the drop in Microsoft's Window's sales.
So, Intuit please stop leading us on. Either commit to the Mac version of Quicken or drop it. Doing the latter will probably free up some hot shot software folks to take the risk and invest in developing a financial program for the Mac.
item.96471
Bob Murphy
Dana Baggett quotes 'Quicken Adriel' as saying:
'That means check printing, investment registers, Bank Bill Pay, Quicken Bill Pay and dozens of other features didn't make it in. If we had unlimited resources, it'd be done. We're listening, but it doesn't mean we can do everything you ask.'
It sounds like that leaves the new Quicken for Mac with roughly similar features to Moneydance, iBank, and many other one-person or small-team programs. If so, that's pathetic.
'Download data directly from your bank to Quicken. ... The new Quicken for Mac supports importing data directly into Quicken from your banks. We don't support qif - but that file format has been deprecated.'
So Intuit has dropped an open-standards format they can't charge banks to use. They will doubtless continue to support QFX, which they do charge banks for. And I wonder if Intuit will continue their history of maintaining - and charging banks for - separate Mac and Windows versions of QFX, which leaves many banks just not supporting their Mac customers because they don't want to pay the extra fees.
And 'Quicken Dan' is quoted as saying:
'I hate to pull the 'I just work here' card but in this case I really can't speak to the level of resources and whether it's appropriate or not, at least not in any detail... budgets are tight across many industries, and the software business (particularly desktop software) is no exception. I will say that just throwing warm bodies at a project doesn't necessarily bring it in faster (see 'The Mythical Man-Month'). Intuit may be big, but Mac desktop software is just one part of what is a very big puzzle... '
We programmers in the trenches have little effect on strategic corporate decisions. But we don't have to make excuses for them, either. Intuit has had plenty of time, money, and resources to write a great Mac version of Quicken. I'm sure their current Mac team is doing the best they can now, but that doesn't make up for the fact that Intuit chose to spend much of the last decade milking and ignoring its Mac customer base and will now be delivering a substandard product.
Intuit's last Form 10-Q indicates that for the quarter ending April 30, 2009, their net income for the quarter was over $484 million, and they had over $1.2 billion in cash. Some of the quarter's income was doubtless a blip from tax season, but according to their 2008 annual report, consumer tax software only is 30% of their income.
Intuit spent $1,847,500 in 2008 on federal lobbying (http://www.implu.com/lobby_client/1994). A smidgen of googling shows Intuit also spent about $500,000 a few years ago on lobbying to kill a California program to help low-income and elderly state residents fill out their tax returns, and Intuit is reported as contributing roughly $2 million in 2006 to defeat the election of one of that program's sponsors.
So Intuit has huge piles of money, and is happy to spend it on politics. But they don't have budget for their Mac team? Here's a quarter, kid, call somebody who cares.
item.96474
Bob Murphy
Thinking a little more, Intuit's attempt to woo its vanishing Mac customer base would make a great country-and-western song.
A husband sees his wife carrying suitcases out the door to a taxicab. 'What are you doing?' 'You've been taking me for granted for ten years, so I'm leaving.' 'But... but... wait... I'll call and have some flowers delivered! Oh, damn, it'll take them a half hour to get here.' 'Sorry, Travis, the cab's waiting.' 'But Velma, what am I gonna do without you?' 'You should've thought about that before. Maybe you'll treat your next wife better, but I doubt it. Bye!'
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2023
Categories |