🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: alt.comp.software.financial.quickbooks
Article #95

Re: QB2001 pro review

#95
From: mblockNO_SPAM
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:25
166 lines
9947 bytes
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:43:03 -0600, "Karl Schmidt" <karl@xtronics.com>
wrote:

>Hey, I installed the blasted software - it lacks any features that would get
>me to buy it.  It appears you have some kind of interest in this. see below
>
>> What something DOES NOT DO is always totally irrelevant. You
>> should always ask, "what does it do & what does it cost?"
>
>Not if you are trying to find a customer and you have a phone number and zip
>code - you know they are in the data base - you just can't search unless you
>export the customer list. - Where do you get this "..DOES NOT DO is always
>totally irrelevant" - it is quite relevant.

What something does not do is relevant ONLY IF YOU HAVE 
ALTERNATIVES. QB99 does not do it. Peachtree & other low cost
mainstream accounting programs do not do it or economically import
recent QB accounting data. If this is the one thing that matters to you, 
don't buy QB2001. With about 90% of the small business accounting
market Intuit is not so foolish as to waste money getting the other 10%.
Some always want new features, but only a very few agree on a given
feature. That is why hundreds of companies come and go & Intuit rules
with QB, Quicken and TurboTax. If they get any better they will lose it all
in an anti-monopoly attack.

>> I previously listed dozens of very useful new QB2001 features,
>> starting with an outstanding new menu design that instantly jumps
>> between your open windows, quickly returns to recent data files
>> and prevents most backup/restore errors.
>
>Just what I want - software that "prevent MOST backup/restores 
>errors"-<sigh, groan, cough, cardiac pain>

Backup errors & lack of backups kill many times the number of 
small businesses that QB competitors have as customers. Better
QB2001 backups may determine whether you or your competitor 
survives. CPAs who do not inform clients of serious risks, when
there are reasonable alternatives, get sued for malpractice.  Of 
course, clients need not listen.

>> QB still does not do medical billing or milk the cows. It does not
>> even have a programmable database. That is what all supposedly
>> influential QB6 pre-release beta testers said was most important
>> more than three years ago, at prices of up to $2,000 a copy.
>
>Hate to tell you - but SQL is free - and someone will have software for the
>small business that uses it sooner or later. I would spend $1000 for a QB99
>pro like GUI front end.

39 years ago, when there were no database programs, I wrote my own.
We have long used SQL and others. For over a year my website has 
had, by far, the largest list of QB add-ons. Included there, and often
mentioned here, is a $100 datablox program. It converts QB to Access, 
so SQL can search phone numbers and lots more.

>> By listening to its research, not us, QB has since increased market
>> share from 78% to about 90%. This occurred even though a rather big
>> survey by Doug Sleeter (http://sleeter.com/) showed 98% of QB2000
>> users were initially unhappy with it and all CPAs opposed it.
>
>So, we should buy it because they are good at marketing??? They have become
>the M$ of the accounting software world - so how is that good for me?

There was a time when Peachtree and BPI - Accpac had near 100% of 
the small business market. Intuit buried them. It has and will continue
to revolutionize how we manage our businesses and finances because
of its ease of use, ease of correction and power, not tired marketing.

>> Doug's new survey shows most users warmly embracing QB2001,
>> with all CPAs trying to move clients to it as fast as possible. You
>> really should visit his website to read the full review, with its
>> many excellent screen shots.
>
>I could write a survey that would show mothers like broken glass - but this
>still won't fix the data condensing problem and lack of search capabilities.
>I smell a financial interest on your part???

When QB had about an 78% market share a survey showed only about 15%
of CPAs supported it. It is ridiculous to suggest that many independent CPAs,
committed by professionalism AND THE LAW to the best low cost client 
accounting programs, violated their trust by encouraging QB upgrades until
2000. Then we all suddenly decided to abandon it and equally suddenly 
decided to embrace QB2001. Why would we make two opposite decisions 
due to our personal financial interest, when that interest and our professional
obligations remained constant in this area?

Sure we fought QB about buying 2000 tax tables for each client, not for each
copy of QB. However, we resolved that by 2/15/00. Doug's 2000 survey was 
after that & was about the same as the 2001 survey. QB2000 was the first QB
having excessive problems & needing excessive training. Most CPAs did 
clients a favor by saying that. Market share grew once QB2000 came out 
due to an unprecedented event - old and new customers wanted  QB99, so
production resumed. Only when 2001 arrived did 99 & 2000 production stop.

Market share also grew because of serious Y2K problems with everything
before QB99. Many also bought 2000 because they knew that most QB
knowledgeable CPAs always encouraged QB upgrades or they wanted a 
new feature or upgrades cost little more tax tables.
   
>> QB Pro 2001 is only $119.95 from CompUSA, after an $80 rebate. We
>> like it so much that our clients get it, & A FREE 462 PAGE QB BOOK,
>> FOR $100 **> INSTALLED! <**
>>
>And a two user update? Anyway my point is why install it even if it
>was free? Unless you want a slower system, risks of new bugs, etc.

I remember when a megabyte of memory cost more than $10,000, not 
the 40 cents it does now (256mb,  less than $100). CPAs once bought
programs costing $5,000, with dollars worth double. These programs
were bargains for what they did, though we wished for more. Today's
programs and computers are ridiculous bargains with incredible power, 
so it is hard to relate to those crying over what they cannot do YET!

Besides, I may know your problem. QB2001 is FASTER unless you 
have 32mb or less of main memory or run other programs with it in 
less than 128mb (about $60). 128mb is the minimum Intuit wanted last 
year for linking QB and TurboTax ProSeries. Modern computers are 
four times as fast as the four year old ones that should be thrown away. 
Each new QB, Office and other serious program does us a favor by 
being written for fairly recent computers, so we dump time wasting relics.

>> There are very few things that will so increase your productivity
>> for less than $10 a month. I really think it is actually making my
>> office a happier place to be.
>
>After installing the new software on a spare machine - loading up my 
>company file and fiddling with it for an hour or so I remain unconvinced 
>that it would increase productivity - it might even reduce it - having 
>to train folks on the new 'features' dealing with new bugs etc. If I 
>just HAD to have multilevel pricing, I would probably upgrade. - But I 
>don't.. I  write this to save others that hour.
>
> - So hear this --
>
>If there is a feature you just gotta have in QB2001 go buy it - if not -
>just stay with the old dependable QB99

Hear this: you are not supported by a single CPA in a large number 
surveyed. QB and accounting programs are our business. We and 
our staffs may do nothing but use QB daily. Our clients are like you, 
in wanting to minimize bookkeeping time and amounts they pay us. 
That is why we are pushing them to upgrade to save us both time 
and money. 

QB2001 is such a dream that my total upgrade and training time, for 
clients AND staff, is less than eight hours. Of course, I had a big 
advantage that you and my staff did not, as I again pre-release beta 
tested QB for months before the official release. We saved our eight
hours in less than two days, by quickly and instinctively switching 
between open QB windows and recent QB files, and by returning to 
our place in reports after drilling down.

We will save 20 times as much with better backups and less disaster
recovery time this year. You may do what you like, as we all often do.
However, you endanger & hurt any QB user not upgrading.

     Mike Block - Tax Cut CPA
  World's #1 QuickBooks Top Tester
    FREE  NetLedger accounting 
  FREE 462p QB books/error codes
100+ QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/
QB no-spam news: biz.comp.accounting
-----------------------------------
Spam bait admin@localhost abuse@localhost
 webmaster@localhost postmaster@127.0.0.1
 enforcement@sec.gov cyberfraud@nasaa.org
Technical Details
Message-ID: <3a79ac5c.67588780@news.mindspring.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail
References: <EOsc6.3493$Uo2.7620@newsfeed.slurp.net> <3a72f28b.53735713@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <43Jc6.963$2t5.94029@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <oOEd6.7143$Uo2.26636@newsfeed.slurp.net>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 112670,5c768315e6d2cfac
X-Google-Attributes: gid112670,public
X-Google-Thread: fbe20,4dfb51ffed86b6ba,start
X-Google-Attributes: gidfbe20,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-30 22:29:52 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail
From: <mblockNO_SPAM@blocktax.com> (Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A.)
Newsgroups: alt.comp.software.financial.quickbooks,biz.comp.accounting
Subject: Re: QB2001 pro review
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:25:41 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Lines: 169
Approved: mblock@blocktax.com
Message-ID: <3a79ac5c.67588780@news.mindspring.com>
References: <EOsc6.3493$Uo2.7620@newsfeed.slurp.net> <3a72f28b.53735713@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <43Jc6.963$2t5.94029@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <oOEd6.7143$Uo2.26636@newsfeed.slurp.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: d1.56.a4.56
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Server-Date: 31 Jan 2001 06:26:59 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452