| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 12:47 am Post subject:
Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
How does Money 2006 differ from 2002? I currently have the 2002
version. Should I upgrade?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dick Watson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 12:57 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
M06 has Yodlee (http://umpmfaq.info/faqdb.php?q=171) and lots of ads and
crap that came with M05 (http://umpmfaq.info/Money2005.htm) but generally
does not seem quite as disgusting as M05
(http://umpmfaq.info/Money2006.htm). I'm still seeing M06 crash a lot. I
think I'm about to pull the plug on it and stick with M04 for another year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William R Wood
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 8:22 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
I ran the trial version of Money 2006 for a few weeks and I am sticking with
2002. I did not see a single useful difference between 06 and 02 except
that I vastly prefer the interface of 02. Plus 2006 automatically expires
downloads after 2 years in an attempt to force you to upgrade. Not a good
deal in my eyes. I am sticking with 2002 probably forever. Oh I forgot,
2006 reports transfers between the cash part and investment part of
investment accounts in budget reports. That means when you buy or sell
securities your normal budget reports are thrown totally out of whack. This
problem alone keeps me in Money 2002 which does not have this bug.
Regards,
Bill Wood
Fountain Hills, AZ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Cowles
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:01 pm Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
| Quote: | I'm still seeing M06 crash a lot. I think I'm about to pull the plug on it
and stick with M04 for another year.
|
After having done a complete rebuild by export and reimport, M06 has been
running fine for me. It's acceptably fast. That should not be necessary,
because it's something I'd expect the repair tool to do. But the same file
corruption was probably affecting M04, as well.
Export/import loses a lot and is not to be taken lightly, but I think I'll
probably end up doing it every few years just to keep the file clean.
--
Chris Cowles
Gainesville, FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dick Watson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 1:02 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
My concerns would be loans--a biggie since counting closed ones I have 11 of
them, bills, and things like addresses and account numbers and all of the
comments I have in classification and category and account details and so
forth. There's just no good way to get any of this latter stuff out. I know.
I've been trying to find ways in support of the reverse engineering project.
The BP and LP would be No Big Deal given the cleanup aspects involved. I
suspect you are right in that such a process would weed out lots of kruft
that's wedged in there; boy is it an ugly prospect, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dick Watson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 1:02 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
Let me ask you another question: did the QIF cycle retain the Paycheck tab
assignments? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Cowles
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 1:02 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
| Quote: | I'd lose **way more data** than I want to lose doing that. As you note,
Money put the data in there. If it can't deal with the data, it should do
what it needs to do.
|
I was able to reinstate manually the data that didn't import. Basically,
that means loans, budget, and the lifetime planner. The budget was pretty
junky, anyway. Loans were a bit tedious. The lifetime planner wasn't really
much input once the others were in place.
If I had converted to Quicken because of disenchantment with Money, the data
entry task probably would have been larger and the data quality lower. The
latter is true because of my lack of familiarity with the nuances of
Quicken.
Considering the outcome, it was worthwhile. But it's aggravating that I had
to consider it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dick Watson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 1:02 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
I'd lose **way more data** than I want to lose doing that. As you note,
Money put the data in there. If it can't deal with the data, it should do
what it needs to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Cowles
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 9:02 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
| Quote: | Let me ask you another question: did the QIF cycle retain the Paycheck tab
assignments?
|
No, but that's really only cosmetic. I don't care that the older
transactions don't have the tabbed appearance. It did retain association
with the correct categories, which is what matters.
When I recreated our paychecks in the bill scheduler, I simply updated the
most recent paycheck deposits in the register from 'split' to 'paycheck'. At
that point Money lets you move a line item from one tab to another. I did
that, then saved it as a recurring transaction. Worked fine.
--
Chris Cowles
Gainesville, FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Barnes
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 9:02 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
If I were you I would stay with 2002. Nothing after 2004 is worth anything.
Tons of missing features, and if you have investments, good luck getting
that feature to work properly consistently
| Quote: | How does Money 2006 differ from 2002? I currently have the 2002
version. Should I upgrade? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dick Watson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 9:02 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
Check. But TE does use the tab metadata--at least the BT tab. I guess the
time to do this would be early in the year, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris Cowles
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 11:12 pm Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
| Quote: | Check. But TE does use the tab metadata--at least the BT tab. I guess the
time to do this would be early in the year,
|
I don't trust tax export for my taxes. I do import the previous years'
return which preserve dependent and employer info, etc. For the little bit I
have, data entry from a few 1098s and W-2s does not constitute much work.
If I had a schedule C, D or F I might feel differently. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dick Watson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Nov 14, 2005 1:01 am Post subject:
Re: Money 2002 upgrade to 2006 |
|
|
I don't use the data to go to the taxes--there the Paycheck tab would
probably be irrelevant anyway--but do use the tax estimator until about the
15th of January of the next year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in